Review of FreeCAD

Have some feature requests, feedback, cool stuff to share, or want to know where FreeCAD is going? This is the place.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
MisterMaker
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:41 am

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by MisterMaker »

Please don't use colored text, not everyone uses the white background theme and blue text is just painful to read with a dark theme ;)
User avatar
thomas-neemann
Veteran
Posts: 11801
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:03 pm
Location: Osnabrück DE 🇩🇪
Contact:

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by thomas-neemann »

jimmihenry wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:37 pm ....
An open reply to Tom Sanladerer


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0n6LgZB03A

phpBB [video]
Gruß Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Thomas Neemann

https://www.youtube.com/@thomasneemann5 ... ry=freecad
User avatar
easyw-fc
Veteran
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 9:34 am

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by easyw-fc »

thomas-neemann wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:45 pm An open reply to Tom Sanladerer
and even an other approach for the 'problem' of Thomas design

phpBB [video]


Showing that a simple query at the forum would have solved the designing specific problem of Thomas.

EDIT:
From tearandfix (the author of the video)
In this video I recreated a part that was discussed in Thomas Sanladerer video

This is only a one of the multiple ways how to do it.
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53930
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by chrisb »

easyw-fc wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:41 pm and even an other approach for the 'problem' of Thomas design
Small improvement recommendation: Instead of making a 360° revolve and then cut half of it, you could have made a 180° revolve.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Jee-Bee
Veteran
Posts: 2566
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by Jee-Bee »

I think i'm a quite long but critical FC User.
And i understand 100% the users that feel the frustration that improvements/ suggestions/ .../ complains are not heard.
I agree fully that when asking for an improvement to often is said "It is intentionally" or i read "you are wrong"(of course it is no quote but i assume you understand).
To often the discussion is about if something a bug, a limitation, an usability issue, FR, FI, etc, etc.

I would like to see / read that more is about, maybe that is an improvement, but is it better than .... (current method or feature). Or can live both side by side?
Example More than once the requist is there about the linear pattern to use the amount and the delta. More than once a user started and i'm not sure it is implemented now...(i have 20.2). The reason i assume is compatibility. It is an argument that can kill every improvement. I think it helps if we as more or less experinced users are open to the improvements. Of course not all improvements are in our hands and of course not all improvements are equally high priority.
But if you read in your first 10 posts 3 times no i don't come back either.


To finish on a positive i had the same type of discussions also with Creo Users / Trainers or SW Users so you (to everybody). are not the only one ;)
User avatar
onekk
Veteran
Posts: 6146
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:48 am
Contact:

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by onekk »

Jee-Bee wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 1:58 pm ...
The reason i assume is compatibility. It is an argument that can kill every improvement.
...
Yes and no, as not too much time ago an user from India was complaining about mist if his models that he has done for his company were not working anymore due to a modification in FreeCAD.

In this case improvement is a good thing or not?

I care very much about compatibility, at least at file level.

If format is not "formally changed" (as example from 1.0 to 1.1 format version ) and I have not used a "prohibited way" of doing things (and this prohibition has to be clearly written in documentation.) I will be very upset in such a change, and probably you agree on that.

On such cases some automatic warning should be issued and when possible a conversion option should be proposed (internally or with help of a conversion program).

If not this improvement will be a "bad thing".

Different matter is UI changes and UX polishing as it is an usual thing that maybe between version of a complex software some extent of retraining is not an unusual thing.

Speaking about review you are in a difficult area (you as a reviewer generally speaking) as hiw much what you are used to do will bias your judgement?

When there are not an uniform way of doing things, probably being objective (hoping it as a correct meaning in English) could be difficult.

If you are used to a specific software how much you will be "not influenced" by your habits?

Regards

Carlo D.
GitHub page: https://github.com/onekk/freecad-doc.
- In deep articles on FreeCAD.
- Learning how to model with scripting.
- Various other stuffs.

Blog: https://okkmkblog.wordpress.com/
User avatar
adrianinsaval
Veteran
Posts: 5541
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:15 pm

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by adrianinsaval »

Jee-Bee wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 1:58 pm Example More than once the requist is there about the linear pattern to use the amount and the delta.
I can't remember anyone ever saying this shouldn't be made, it can be implemented as an option, the only thing stopping this from happening is that nobody has made a PR for it.
Jee-Bee
Veteran
Posts: 2566
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by Jee-Bee »

onekk wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 2:15 pm Yes and no, as not too much time ago an user from India was complaining about mist if his models that he has done for his company were not working anymore due to a modification in FreeCAD.

In this case improvement is a good thing or not?

I care very much about compatibility, at least at file level.
In normal situations it should open older files. Specially during development it is normal that some features (and thus files)break. to me the question is how much older. If i want to open a file that has pre .15 Part Design models should we able to open them on current FC?*

My argument and that was not made completly clear (also when reading back) is that there are also possibilities that some features has some variations live side by side. I don't know if the FC build number is saved with each model.
If i go back to my example of the Pattern. If you replace the the total length and amount with delta and amount it gives trouble! and i understand too that, that is unwanted! If You create an option to switch between total length + amount and delta + amount (adittional config option for default) then still older models are able to open.

onekk wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 2:15 pm If format is not "formally changed" (as example from 1.0 to 1.1 format version ) and I have not used a "prohibited way" of doing things (and this prohibition has to be clearly written in documentation.) I will be very upset in such a change, and probably you agree on that.
First you expect that the documentation is read well. If Everybody start with Reading the Wiki i guess 70 % of the questions are not asked
Beside that my personal experience is that documentation is also used for noting that something don't work (completly or have drawnbacks)
onekk wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 2:15 pm Speaking about review you are in a difficult area (you as a reviewer generally speaking) as hiw much what you are used to do will bias your judgement?

When there are not an uniform way of doing things, probably being objective (hoping it as a correct meaning in English) could be difficult.

If you are used to a specific software how much you will be "not influenced" by your habits?
As long as you know you are biased it is not necessarily a problem. The question is how aware are reviewers in how they are fused with there CAD application? Game reviewers play a game in about 40 - 120 hours so after a year you can compare some games(within a genre) With CAD is i thing 1000 hour for a plain CAD Application required. So it takes at least 3 years to compare the major 5(Creo, NX, SW, Inventor and Catia).

* my mind says that PD in 0.15 was not compiled by default so it could be an more early version but i'm not sure
Jee-Bee
Veteran
Posts: 2566
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by Jee-Bee »

adrianinsaval wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 3:26 pm I can't remember anyone ever saying this shouldn't be made
I know, sometimes i'm a bit chaotic in typing/ writing down so probably my last two post make the total story for what i meant.
If after both confusion is sky high...
the shortest version is try to find situations where more than one method is possible is better than defending FC to hard... and don't seeing the room for improvement
adrianinsaval wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 3:26 pm nobody has made a PR for it.
I can say about my self I didn't. And the one two or three times i point to the right locations pity enough you are right...
Last edited by Jee-Bee on Tue Apr 04, 2023 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
adrianinsaval
Veteran
Posts: 5541
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:15 pm

Re: Review of FreeCAD

Post by adrianinsaval »

Jee-Bee wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 3:31 pm If you replace the the total length and amount with delta and amount it gives trouble! and i understand too that, that is unwanted! If You create an option to switch between total length + amount and delta + amount (adittional config option for default) then still older models are able to open.
But this is well known to be possible and similar things have been done already in PD. Who ever told you this wasn't possible or acceptable? I doubt it was a dev...

Like I said the absence of such an option boils down to nobody taking the time to make it happen... I don't think there's any meaningful opposition to the idea
Post Reply