Autodesk Inventor Wish List (results)

[Anonymous]

Thank you for your input to begin defining an official Inventor Wish List! With over 500 Inventor users voting, the Top 10 results in order are: 1. Assembly configurations 2. Alternate positions, i.e. door in open and closed positions 3. Create holes from fastener types 4. Object Snap capabilities like AutoCAD 5. Native Inventor Viewer 6. Additional assembly/machining features 7. Preserve assembly constraints during promote/demote 8. Automatically center dimension text 9. Zero clean-up of DWG Export 10. Create folders in browser for logical groupings and sorting You can review the full results of the survey at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=34164890290 until February 2, 2004. I'd like to thank you once more for all your great input! Your feedback will be valuable in planning future versions of Autodesk Inventor. -- Jeff Wymer Product Manager, Autodesk Inventor Manufacturing Solutions Division Autodesk, Inc.

[Anonymous]

I'm not going to pretend to be a solids expert , so correct me if I'm wrong. I am a battle weary veteran of many design projects, so give me credit. When I speak of "configurations" I speak SW terms. SE uses "states" (I think). The ability to show different modifications of a single part file. Example: a cube, and a cube with a hole in it, in the same part file. Different than assy configs. I have a die with 75 parts totaling 25 megs, but the assy file is only 250K. It would seem assy configs, worst case scenario, could create a whole new assy file within the original assy file without much difficulty or file size. "Alternate Positions" sounds like some kind of "constraints" manipulator. An even simpler subset of the original assy file. Combine both assy and alt configs and it gets complicated. Add Adaptiveity and it becomes a mess. Add "configs" (SW term) and your brain explodes. That's OK, my entire industry exploded, I'm just trying to figure out which corner to run. if adsk explodes, that's ok too. 3D may be the only way for many firms, but for most 3d is an emerging technology. As stated earlier in this topic, many firms don't even have usegroup access. 20 years ago we were all debating weather to buy Elox or Agie, and no one even heard of Mitsubishi. I'm only concerned about configs because it fulfills a fundamental need for my specific industry. Did I make myself clear?

[Anonymous]

I'd post it but I don't know if I'll get in trouble, If I hear nothing in the next couple of days I'll dig it out for you.
Regards
MattH

[Anonymous]

"That's OK, my entire industry exploded, I'm just trying to figure out which corner to run." Settle in for a permanent change in manufacturing. I don't think it will ever be the same as before, but I firmly believe there will be a place for US companies to be successful, as long as they accept our new reality and find a way to be competitive anyway. I would suggest running towards companies that have already started adapting to the new order, and sell their creativity and use of technology to stay ahead. Anthony Fettig Chief Operating Officer Entrust Tool and Design Co., Inc. BTW, I'll take whatever version of "configurations" Autodesk can deliver, as long as they have a strategy through the next several releases mapped out so they don't box themselves in with the initial features. "Diemaker" wrote in message news:hfa1001ducbcm9auuv5ngms0fr92u8a1b8@4ax.com... > I'm not going to pretend to be a solids expert , so correct me if I'm > wrong. I am a battle weary veteran of many design projects, so give me > credit. When I speak of "configurations" I speak SW terms. SE uses > "states" (I think). The ability to show different modifications of a > single part file. Example: a cube, and a cube with a hole in it, in > the same part file. Different than assy configs. I have a die with 75 > parts totaling 25 megs, but the assy file is only 250K. It would seem > assy configs, worst case scenario, could create a whole new assy file > within the original assy file without much difficulty or file size. > "Alternate Positions" sounds like some kind of "constraints" > manipulator. An even simpler subset of the original assy file. Combine > both assy and alt configs and it gets complicated. Add Adaptiveity and > it becomes a mess. Add "configs" (SW term) and your brain explodes. > That's OK, my entire industry exploded, I'm just trying to figure out > which corner to run. if adsk explodes, that's ok too. 3D may be the > only way for many firms, but for most 3d is an emerging technology. As > stated earlier in this topic, many firms don't even have usegroup > access. 20 years ago we were all debating weather to buy Elox or Agie, > and no one even heard of Mitsubishi. I'm only concerned about configs > because it fulfills a fundamental need for my specific industry. Did I > make myself clear? >

[Anonymous]

Also if you are in the dimension dialog click on the arrow and measure is an option. That will dump the result from the measure tool directly in the dialog. Kathy Johnson

[Anonymous]

I am somewhat ashamed to say that I am one of the 279,500 people who did NOT fill out the survey - though I am connected, and concerned.

1. I do more posting, coorisponding, or working through my reseller most of the time.

2. Polls often do not have one of my top choices as a selection.

3. Often, one of the ones I would have voted for makes it into the top ten, despite my apathy.

4. A lot of wish list items are often devolution - lost features from previous versions. If wish lists made it 100 percent of the time, there may also be more interest.

5. I just do not take the time like I should.

Steven

[Anonymous]

Do you also not vote? :) "steved" wrote in message news:10986846.1073917777196.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum1.autodesk.com... > I am somewhat ashamed to say that I am one of the 279,500 people who did NOT fill out the survey - though I am connected, and concerned. > > 1. I do more posting, coorisponding, or working through my reseller most of the time. > > 2. Polls often do not have one of my top choices as a selection. > > 3. Often, one of the ones I would have voted for makes it into the top ten, despite my apathy. > > 4. A lot of wish list items are often devolution - lost features from previous versions. If wish lists made it 100 percent of the time, there may also be more interest. > > 5. I just do not take the time like I should. > > Steven

[Anonymous]

Un-dirty-word-believable!!!!!!!!!
Ever since Rev 4 I've been screaming to upgrade the detailing side of inventor. The things I've literally begged for were dual dimensions (which were added for Rev 5) and instream modifiers for dimensions...which has yet to be addressed.

Please tell me, who here does NOT see a major need for instream modifiers? Talk about a time saver, this would do the trick, big time.

Come on ADesk, get with the program! Instream modifiers have been the norm on CAD for many, many years.

[Anonymous]

Forgive my ignorance, but what is an "instream modifier"? Thanks, VR P.S. Out of curiosity, does adding the "dirty-word" do anything for you? I find that adding the extra "stress" words only adds confusion. It seems that one word has a bazillion meanings. How do I know what it means in each context. While I am trying to figure that out, I usually miss the point of the conversation thus defeating the point of adding the extra "meaningless" word. Is this just me or do others have a similar problem. "pdnm1" wrote in message news:7745935.1073924038666.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum1.autodesk.com... > Un-dirty-word-believable!!!!!!!!! > Ever since Rev 4 I've been screaming to upgrade the detailing side of inventor. The things I've literally begged for were dual dimensions (which were added for Rev 5) and instream modifiers for dimensions...which has yet to be addressed. > > Please tell me, who here does NOT see a major need for instream modifiers? Talk about a time saver, this would do the trick, big time. > > Come on ADesk, get with the program! Instream modifiers have been the norm on CAD for many, many years.

[Anonymous]

It's just you ;) QBZ "Vadim" wrote in message news:4002da04$1_3@statler... > Is this just me or do others have a similar problem.

[Anonymous]

> Aren't 1 and 2 the same? If you have configurations you could have the door > in 2 positions. > > > 1. Assembly configurations > > 2. Alternate positions, i.e. door in open and closed positions Cylinder extended vs retracted compared to Channel in this configuration vs Tube in that configuration -- Darren J. Young CAD/CAM Systems Developer Cold Spring Granite Company 202 South Third Avenue Cold Spring, Minnesota 56320 Email: dyoung@coldspringgranite.com Phone: (320) 685-5045 Fax: (320) 685-5052

[Anonymous]

In article <3fff1d15$1_1@statler>, gary.r.smith@autodesk.com says... > > Aren't 1 and 2 the same? > > Depends on how you define things... > > A configuration could mean completely different doors, whereas the > positional thing just means: door_open vs door_closed (for example) Support for any of this should also be allowed to be driven from a spreadsheet and/or user parameters IMO. -- Darren J. Young CAD/CAM Systems Developer Cold Spring Granite Company 202 South Third Avenue Cold Spring, Minnesota 56320 Email: dyoung@coldspringgranite.com Phone: (320) 685-5045 Fax: (320) 685-5052

[Anonymous]

now I'm just real embarrassed at that decimal point mistake!!!!!!!!! msk

[Alex123]

Explain what an "instream modifier" is. I haven't a clue.

[Anonymous]

I'm with Vadim and Alex,

What are Instream modifiers??

I must be another one of those kept in the dark?

Al

[Anonymous]

Configurations should also allow you to vary the quantity of an item. For example, a simple lattice frame 20' long may contain (4) 5' panels of lateral and wind bracing while a 30' long frame may contain (6) 5' panels of bracing.

[Anonymous]

Ok, first...the "dirty-word" add in is a clean way of saying what most here say but gets edited. It's also a ref to the comedy of Bill Cosby....you may realize, he never swears but instead says "dirty-word" or "foul", "filth", etc in place thereof...clear?

Now for the task at hand, in stream modifiers are the extra call out you may need to add to a dimension. Let's say any prefixed or appended text, FCS boxes, etc.

For example you need to call out a dimension of a diameter with the additions of....oh let's say 4 places, thru, and you also need to hold it's location using geometric tolerances. This dimension is being called out in a section view so it's a linear dimension thus the preset diameter symbol does not come into play here.

You also happen to have other dimensions just like this one to call out in the very same way, or heck, even just a few minor differences.

As it stands now, you must insert the dimension, get out of the dimension command, add the text, get out of the text command, add the FCS box and then get out of that so you can repeat this same thing for each one you need to call out in the very same way.

If we had "in-stream modifiers" you could do all this on the fly from within the dimension command, make whatever changes if needed for each dimension you are about to insert and keep going until you're done dimensioning. In essence you could possibly dimension your entire part with each dimension having completely different call outs and never have to get out of the dimension command.

This is something that is offered on higher end packages such as CADDS5 (RIP) and Pro/E if I recall, among others.

[gnrnr]

I only have access at work, not at home. I live too far away to get a good connection anyway (dial up only).

[gnrnr]

I would figure that SDotson would be at the top of that list 🙂

Steve

[xavierl]

I think in the old autocad language it was a 'transparent command'
FX Liebenberg

[Anonymous]

> Configurations should also allow you to vary the quantity of an item. For > example, a simple lattice frame 20' long may contain (4) 5' panels of > lateral and wind bracing while a 30' long frame may contain (6) 5' panels of > bracing. I can do that now from a spreadsheet with Arrays. But yes, that should be supported as well. I can think of a number of examples where "Configurations" would be nice. I've seen many examples of "part on top of part" because one or the other is used. Sometimes one part is a "mirror" other times it's "identical" so depending on the size of an assembly, one or the other might be used so BOM quantities are accurate. -- Darren J. Young CAD/CAM Systems Developer Cold Spring Granite Company 202 South Third Avenue Cold Spring, Minnesota 56320 Email: dyoung@coldspringgranite.com Phone: (320) 685-5045 Fax: (320) 685-5052