Fed up with Autodesk
@johnsonshiue wrote:
Could you give me an example of a dated issue not yet resolved? I am more than happy to take a look and follow up with project teams and get back to you.
When were assembly folders a new feature? 2007?
11 years and the same limitations are still present for component patterns, cable/harness nodes/ virtual components/ tube and pipe nodes,etc....
This one cost me time EVERYDAY...
Hi Brian,
Assembly folder was first available on Inventor 2010, not 2007. It was a while back indeed. As you know, that particular request is on our radar and it is done yet.
Many thanks!
Guys,
We all know Inventor has a lot of room for improvement. Nobody doubts it. Whoever says otherwise is not using it. We all know everybody has good ideas to propose. However, please leverage Inventor Ideas forum or participate in Inventor Beta (https://bit.ly/InventorBeta). We cannot manage requests by forum threads. It makes it hard to track and confusing. Inventor cannot program itself. Things take time to do.
Let me repeat myself. Inventor is a no-so-perfect professional tool, built by a team of passionate people like you. Your feedback is more than welcome. To facilitate better communication, it is better to be specific and issue-oriented.
Many thanks!
@RJR89 wrote:
I'm not wasting my time digging through forums for posts I already know offer no solutions but a few examples include:
Well.. to be fair... requests for new functionality doesn't really count as being ignored as that is driven by customer demand and I don't believe any of us single users are in the position to determine that the demand is there or not... Now show me where 10,000 users have stated that and sure... But a few hundred does not amount to sufficient demand to develop a new function..
I thought you were going to bring valid bugs or limitations that are being ignored.. boo.. 
And yes I suppose one could lump my browser folder issue into a new feature but I will argue all day that its a half finished function that hasn't been completed until it covers all browser nodes so its not "new functionality"
Consider that if Autodesk left everything in the UI as it was there would just as many voices complaining that the program looks like it's stuck in the 90's. Ribbons are viewed as more consistent with other programs, and as more recent UI development they're also more tolerant of the higher resolution displays.
In the end we, the users, aren't in control of what gets developed and what doesn't.
If you are going to fly by the seat of your pants, expect friction burns.
"I don't know" is the beginning of knowledge, not the end.
Yes, it is a classic reply and yes, it is indeed on our radar and we have not got to it yet, as many other issues. But, one has to ask oneself if the tool gets the job done. If Inventor was not up to the task, it should have not existed and the market would have abandoned it. I am not trying to defend every decision the product team makes. We are just here to help. The fact that you are posting on the forum shows that you care as much as we do.
Regarding the BOM item number as part of the label, I am not surprised it can be done swiftly by an API savvy user. This is exact what API is for. Not every solution needs to be a new feature or new workflow. iLogic and API are powerful tools help customize workflows. Certainly, not every request can be fulfilled by iLogic and API. Some will require code change on Inventor side for sure.
Regarding the idw draw order request, do you mind elaborating that? I don't think that one can be done via iLogic and API. I would like to understand the request better.
LOD was designed to be a memory management tool for 32-bit Windows, because only up to 3GB memory was allowed for any given application to use back in the days. Without LOD, Inventor users would not be able to design a large assembly requiring more memory than 3GB. But, some users leverage it as a configuration tool, which is understandable. It does have a little bit configuration ability. However, the BOM view can only be unique at any given time. Also, only one LOD state can be saved at a time. These limitations make LOD ill suited for a configuration tool.
Just like any product in the market, Inventor will always have issues and there are always unfulfilled requests. It is an endless pursuit. I am so glad and so appreciative that the product we are building generates so much feedback albeit positive and negative. At the same time, we can discuss these issues in a transparent fashion. I personally think it is a great improvement in the history of the tool.
BTW, our team helps resolve issues from customers still using 2010 or 2009 on a regular basis. In software industry, I do not believe it is a classic way of doing business.
Many thanks!
@RJR89 wrote:
hahahaha "it's on our radar", classic Autodesk for yeah we're ignoring that one.
I'm not wasting my time digging through forums for posts I already know offer no solutions but a few examples include:
around 2010 - BOM item numbers as view labels on their relevant parts/.ipt's that are associative within .idw's- not part number/filename before u say it. I know a software engineer that made a 3rd party add on that did enable this. He did it in less than a day and has never dealt with CAD software in his life. (but currently autodesk seem to be taking around a decade. and counting)around 2013 - .idw draw order for parts/edges in a drawing view. surely very simple yet ignored for around 5 years now.
Levels of Detail are a nightmare to manage and the forums are crammed with people begging for this to simplified. But at least I know it's "On Autodesks Radar".
Let me be clear, these are examples of requests (of which there are many) for very useful functionality that would save hours of work. Not usual stuff you see from newbies like, my inventor is always crashing or my model isn't turning out the way i want or I thought it Inventor would draw it for me.
I will need to dig into our defect system and get back to you with each issue you mentioned here.
Many thanks!
@pball wrote:
Might as well join in.
I reported that Inventor 2014 returns the last used printer instead of the default printer in the API. This is still true.
2016 when the new drawing view insert dialog came along, if a drawing view scale is changed it's possible a projected view will covered by the main view and the projected view cannot be moved while the view is being created. Reported and received bug 115291 as a number. Still broken in 2018.3
Reported with multiple versions. FileDialog.InitialDirectory is ignored if assembly is open. bug id 84729 and case id 13878504
2018 Measure tool includes units when copying value (win10 only). case id 13878504
API BOM sort method does not respect more than one sort priority. Johnson Shiue agrees this is a defect.
Call oBOMView.Sort("Part Number", True, "REQ Type", False)
Those are a few defects I've received official or unofficial responses from Autodesk employees that the issue is indeed a bug.
You can poke fun at my comments however you like. Respect is mutual. I don't claim to represent the company. I only represent myself.
"Fed up with" can be followed by many things. You can fill in the blank. All I am doing is to make sure communication is clear and transparent. I cannot make things happen magically. I am sorry I cannot deliver the way you want it.
Many thanks!
