STOP CHANGING MY SETTINGS ON UPDATES

[yoshimitsuspeed]

I don't even have words to explain how upset I am right now. At least not words that should be posted on a public forum.
I have wasted probably hundreds of hours dealing with F360 issues, crashes and bugs in the last few months. For someone who is working about 14 hours a day 6+ days a week every time some S happens it is very inconvienent.
After the update I couldn't open a drawing. Error message said I needed to completely remove and reinstall F360.
About an hour later I can open the D drawing.
Now tonight I try to open F360 and all I see is gray. A month ago I had graphics problems where everything disappeared so I figured it was the same issue. So I spend about an hour reinstalling my graphics driver, changing graphics settings, restarting my computer, trying directx 9, directx11, and a whole bunch of other crap. Then I startup my laptop to test it there only to find the same GD problem. Then I figure it can't be my computer so I open up the grid to find out it's been disabled. First thought is maybe a setting got deleted when I reinstalled. Then I realized it couldn't be that because my laptop was the same.

STOP CHANGING MY SETTINGS ON UPDATES.

Some other notes.
After big updates F360 disappears completely from my start tab recent programs. It's like Windows doesn't even recognize it's the same program. If you are going to force me to use microcrap at least make your crap compatible with it.

CAM
After a big update when I go to post process it is completely reset. Error pops up saying folder does not exist would you like to reset to default. Last time I talked to an AD employee they tried to upsell this BS like it is done on purpose and is a feature. It's not a feature it's a PITA bug. I shouldn't have to feel like I am setting up a new program completely from scratch after every update. It should just all work like it did GDFyesterday.
Click yes reset to default location. Now most everything comes back but now the output folder is set back to the GD default.

I'm sure I could go on and on but I am going to hope this is the last of my problems for the night and hope I can get this project finished before midnight.

Edited by
Discussion_Admin

[HughesTooling]

A question about point 2, I saw in a previous post you were uploading a stp or igs file. Have you tried New Design from file. You still have to save to the cloud before you can import it but it still quicker than using the dashboard.

 

Mark

[roambotics_scott]

Yup that works thanks 🙂 and between that, saving, waiting for it to become availiable in the dashboard, and finally inserting it took under a minute.

[glares at AD because the functionality is clearly in the app so the protracted round trip to the cloud is obviously unnecessary]

[TrippyLighting]

@cekuhnen 

I don't have access to many CAD systems these days but, yes, I find the sketch engine leaves to be desired in several areas, speed is one of these areas.

not sure that still should be discussed, however, in this thread. We've gotten a little off topic 😉

[roambotics_scott]

*slightly*

[cekuhnen]

I have to say and be honest I am a designer and use acordingly.

while I see the value in the engineering approach to cad it still does not convince me as being superior.

for certain tasks yes but for the rest I feel that part of the industry is to afraid to evolve.

i enjoy using Siemens NX because it perfectly bridges surface and solid modeling workflows.

so I am really curious about next years advanced modeling tools. There was talk to also rethink the 2d sketch engine.

When I help Eric or others in their design most of the time is spend of guessing how one could build it Fusion because of how restrictive

that process actually is. And in addition to that also the surfacing tools lack a lot.

i really hope next year fusion will be like design differently.

this semester I will teach fusion again as the las to step tool for making the solids but not use it for the concept phase.

and maybe that is also ok so - because this way the student see what strong solid modeling is in Fusion and what strong surfacing modeling is in Alias.

But I could only imagine for company owners they rather would like to have both in one

in 2015 we still have this split in how engineers work and how designers work and I feel they are not compatible.

In my view apps like NX are ideal because they give each person the same tools under one hood and this means

also both engineers and designers have also to learn how to use CAD the same way meaning using the right tool for the right shape.

[cekuhnen]

@TrippyLighting I remember few times that it was stated that they are working on an engine improvement over the past years but recently it was more stated and a restart or rethinking might have to take place because they realized as well that there are glaring performance issues.

Ah well hey Fusion is still pretty new and they constantly add stuff so it can only get better 😉

[roambotics_scott]

Coming from the neither really design nor engineering perspective, I really love what Fusion *could* be: a more modern NX like one stop solution that someone with no experience can sit down with and do both surface modeling and real mechatronic engineering in.

I'm sure something like Alias would give me much more control but the learning curve is pretty steep (and I'm a computer guy).

[Anonymous]

Thanks for your compliments Trippy.  I just try to follow the model less moping, more making, and am always up to a good challenge.  So as you know, for example, we as a collaborative effort were able to elucidate the somewhat finicky behavior of the current solid lofting with rails (which according to @Simon.Hern is hopefully getting improved in next release) as discussed here http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/design-and-documentation/problem-loft-ing-along-3-rails/td-p/5796849/p...

Jesse

[cekuhnen]

@roambotics_scott I feel for solid modeling Fusion is pretty spot on - there is honestly not much I miss or need that isn't in Fusion already. Thats why I like using Fusion when teaching solid parametric modeling. It is really fast and efficient in this respect.

But for surfacing it still falls short with the most basic commands like rails having no G1 or G2. This forces you to construct your design differently meaning more work.

Alias is actually not that hard. Question is if you want to do simple models with G0 G1s or organic shapes with G2 or harder G3 transitions. Then the proper single patch

model approach is going to be a job for a dedictaed Alias sculpter.

And that is basically what I mean that those tools today still have limitations and I feel they are still there because they became accepted and standard in the industry.

If I would argue with an engineer that being limited to sketch planes the person would say wrong because of them we have parametric sketches. I would rather say you

miss out the flexebility of an object based modeling approach that still can be parametric or having a design tree.

It is an interesting struggle the industry is in as each sides thinks their modeling workflow is better without seeing the limitations of each prefered workflow.

Thats why I favor the right tool for the right shape approach and not forcing everything through one engine. And it seems NX - which is not really hard to learn

when you understand how freeform surfacing and solid modelign works - like Catia make a good hybrid there.

[roambotics_scott]

I gotta tell ya - this «moping» thing you keep repeating and «brattiness» is really pissing me off.

Intended or not, it feels like some kind of back handed insult to anyone who has ever been frustrated with the product and said something *in the hope of getting it fixed*

You have no idea how much time people have sunk into whatever they may complain about here and you have no idea how much or for how long they might have tried other approaches.

What that and the «muddy shoes in the promised land» reads as to me is that people are going ape-sh1t over some minor inconvenience that took them an extra 30s for a few hours of work.

The reality is more like (in my case) many, many way more than full time extra weeks on what could have been a 1-2 week project spending hours finding work arounds.

Here I read people losing a day worth of work. For an immortal like you, a day might seem insignificant but mere mortals have a finite number of them and don't appreciate them being thrown out.

[roambotics_scott]

I'm still waiting to get a trial license for NX. It was easy to get a sales droid for SW but NX seems to take a lot of persistence for a little guy. Definitely wanting to try it, though (though I don't like the idea of going through X Windows).

I believe you about Alias.. will have to push through again sometime.

Given the difficulty of shoehorning either workflow into the other, I like the idea of approaching the problem from a new angle. Perhaps that's NX but I can't help but think there is another way that's better still. That'd be a new kind of CAD

[Anonymous]

Scott, I agree loosing data is the one thing that is definitely unacceptable.  But you got to be honest, besides that you've still done a fair share of moping 😉  Which is fine, and I'm not discounting anyone's pains.  But I do know we as a species do need to be "back handed" a lot to get on with things and get a better perspective.

Jesse

[Anonymous]

By the way, now with understanding the peculiarities of the solid loft with rails, the work around is basically not a problem.

Jesse

[cekuhnen]

I am not saying NX is perfect I cannot say that. But it offers surface solid and sub-d modeling and in addition offers 2D sketches and free form curves.

For example in NX you can make a curve rest on the edge of a surface and make it flow into/onto that surface in a smooth way.

In Fusion you would have first to create a new 2D sketch add a line.

Then you have to make a new sketch and project that line onto a surface.

Now you can make a 3rd sketch and create a 3D curve.

I hope you see whats wrong here. And I think that is what AD also realized that in theory parametric and freeform are all good tools for certain tasks

but really important is how smart it is implemented.

[Anonymous]

Well got to do some stuff, but hope you're not going to continue to be all offended Scott

[roambotics_scott]

No dude. You are so off base with my tone you have no idea.

Not moping. Seething. Struggling to contain my frustration and disappointment and trying to channel it into something at least moderately productive.

Huge difference.

Back handed is BS. I don't mean you're coming up and smacking me, I mean you're under your breath mumbling indirect insults (directed at me or others IDGAF)

If you have something to say to me, I'd much rather you say it to my face. The indirect approach earns negative respect from me even if you were on point.

[roambotics_scott]

SO MISSING THE POINT. [for the record - that was screaming btw]

Yes you can work around anything. That's great but it's not how great products get built.

«oh if I walk across the bridge and don't step on any of the off-red bricks, it won't collapse under me».. or someone could, I don't know, fix the bridge maybe.

[roambotics_scott]

Yeah the sketching thing feels broken to me. Not just because I end up with so many coplanar sketches but because I often want to extend things out into 3D and the way it is now feels like an afterthought (3D curves are part of a 2D sketch and I'd not know they were even an option if I wasn't told).

I'll have to at least watch some more NX tutorials to see how things are done there for reference.

[roambotics_scott]

Well, Jesse, I presume you're not going to recognize what you're doing or apologize for it, and that you'll continue being passive-aggressive, so I'll probably continue being «all offended».

The ball is in your court, though.

[TrippyLighting]

@cekuhnen NX ? Catia ?

Last time I checked the Fusion 360 early adopter subscription costs me  $300 a year.

What functionality do you feel is reasonable to expect for that price point ?

What is reasonable to expect for $1200 a year ?

Let's assume the full time Fusion development Team has 100 people. Throw in another 100 that that work on it only part time.  You've got to pay these people pretty regularly I'd assume. Do a little research what a reasonable wage is for a programmer with the ability and expertise to work on a complex enterprise level application involving a good number of 3rd party libraries and frameworks. Even in India and China those people dont exactly work for free.

How many subscriptions do you think Autodesk has to sell to be able to sustain development ? This is not office software that is used by millions of people world wide every day.

How much development effort was spent without any ROI before a subscription model was ever started ?