Autodesk Inventor

[#1]

Again just make Inventor work like it did back in the day.

I think if we put our wishes on the back burner this can happen but if we all keep wishing for more features you are also wishing for a buggy Inventor Like now.

As you can see with all the new things in 2013 you also got more bugs.....

Please just post FIX INVENTOR then we can wish for features..

[#2]

I would be 100% happy if they did that. But, I'm not betting on it. They need things to market with. As far as AD marketing is concerned, IV is already the pinnacle of perfection. To admit otherwise would bring their whole world collapsing down on them. So, if AD is going to add more features they might as well be ones that are actually usefull, instead of more iCloud BS.

[#3]

Guess you don't know why they are going to the cloud...

I will give you a little heads up soon you will not have to load Inventor you will go to the cloud to use it no more local Inventor.....

[#4]

Yeah I know about their crack pipe in the clouds plan... [eye roll]

[#5]

I'm not sure what all of these are but I figured it'd be better to go through them all then to cut out one or two, the hole note one is the one that prompted me to reply

• Dragging leader with Part Priority on does not snap to part edge

?

• Being able to dimension break view line

But if it's in a sketch like a section view line - I don't know if they've figured out how to fix sketches in break views yet

• Different detail view shapes, that can be dimensioned to part sketches, or even use part sketches

Yes, definitely

• Automated centrelines on only certain parts in a view

not sure how that would work

• Window multiselect CL to resize them together

What, kind of like aligning balloons of something?

• Auto CL does not recognize derived parts, i.e. iParts (flanges)

Oh, you do not want to get me started on detailing derived parts and iParts

• Tangent edges on selected parts only

like they did for hidden, yes

• Lock dimensions that are aligned

 is that when you drag some dimensions the ones that were aligned aren't when you're done?

• Snap radius dims to other radius dims

I don't know what you mean, would this be something like needing multiple leaders on a radius dim?

• Dimension to a sketch symbol

is this like not making models for stickers and nameplates?

• Use part properties and values in sketch symbols

somebody said they could do something like this, but have you tried "Override Shape" to use your sketched symbol as a balloon?

• Align sketch symbols with better grip control

is this just the extra click because it can't intuitively switch connection points?

• When copy/paste symbols, I don’t want to deselect the view first

(most of my symbols are for the whole drawing, I don't need to copy symbols attached to views so I've never seen that)

• Link part parameters in the Hole Notes, i.e. PCD

when you right click, in addition to "Edit Hole Note" there is "Text" which brings up the regular text dialog where you can do all that. It would be very nice if you didn't have to leave the hole note dialog to get to it - it would be best if the hole note was in a regular text dialog with the hole stuff (tap, c'bore etc.) available like they did with the view labels etc.

• Add Vertex to leader to open space (i.e., not model edge)

are you pointing at nothing or would it be even better if leaders would recognize a part without going to an edge?

• When editing leader text / normal text, centre the text in the editing window

this is just sloppy implementation of the text dialog, it falls into the category of "ain't never worked but close enough that they will never never ever consider fixing it" that some of us were trying to steer this thread towards near the beginning

[#6]

I think they want neither point to be the center.

[#7]

I was thinking if you could make a part then put it in an assembly (by itself) and bend it one way and another assembly with it bent the other way instead of having to derive then you would have the flat part and all it's properties available.

[#8]

---

dan_inv09 wrote:

I think they want neither point to be the center.

---

Then wouldn't that be a three point circle?

[#9]

I think they mean like in AutoCAD (the name that not must be spoken):

[#10]

Ah, forgot about that one. I don't think I ever even used it in ACAD, center radius and three point were always good for me. Why would he need it in Inventor I wonder...

I thought it was the, uh, non-liquid-that-doesn't-work that is the one that must not be named...