CUI Editor Enhancements

[dcochran]

Hello,

We are looking at ways to improve and enhance the CUI Editor in AutoCAD. As a customer, what improvements would you like to see with CUI?

Thanks in advance for your input!

Doug Cochran
Autodesk, Inc.

[Anonymous]

Actually, the dialog won't fit on anything under 1024×768.

--
R. Robert Bell


wrote in message news:5304522@discussion.autodesk.com...
Quality Over Quantity

CUI Editor sucks because its designed around what 800x600? screen size, i
guess this comment goes toward the whole autocad line.

[mid-awe]

How I wish for a GTK Linux AutoCAD. (I know that'll likely never happen). SVG icons that always look good at any resolution.

[Anonymous]

Tom , why don’t you go exactly backwards and read the whole message, you know exactly back to the part where I mention BIG toolbars.

Here’s a news flash for ya, windows and other sw also easily allow you to directly change the size of text, and icons/toolbars, etc. No need to change the resolution of the monitor. LCD don’t even handle non-native resolutions very well.

With a higher resolution on your monitor you can get a more detailed picture. Yes it takes some fiddling, and some things are less than perfect, however the overall results are well worth it.

1600x1200 on a 20” = 100 DPI
1280x1024 on a 20” = 80 DPI

The 25% improvement may not seem a lot, but you would be surprised.

The larger buttons are easier to distinguish not just because there twice as big in the x-y direction, but there also actually FOUR times larger in area. That allows the buttons to more richly detailed!
(Toolbar Buttons are roughly small=16x16,big=32x32)

Warning if you didn’t notice the sarcasm in the beginning of the msg, here comes a lot more, I’m afraid I took offense to “exactly backwards”
Gloves are now coming off:
I’ve always thought the suggestion to lower the resolution was a simpletons dumb answer.
Lowering the resolution might make things bigger, and bit easier to read, but it does so at the cost of lower resolution, which generally makes things look worse.
Digital camera manufacturers certainly didn’t think that lowering resolution was a way to get a better picture.
Gee, neither did printer manufacturers, it might be hard to tell the difference between a 300 or 600 DPI laser. But I remember the jump from 100 to 300 fairly well.

[Anonymous]

Sorry if I ruined your day, but you really need to maybe cut back on the caffeine, or maybe learn a bit of anger management. I tend to doubt that you scream abuse at people at work in the same vein-throbbing, spit-spraying manner.

I apparently misunderstood your first two sentences to mean what they seemed to say: that you are not using 1600 for the sake of more real estate, but because you hate tiny text and icons. And, as you have said, that is backwards. Now that you've beaten the crap out of me, I see that those two adjacent sentences were two unrelated thoughts.

Yes, the CUI sucks if it isn't designed to work with a reasonable range of resolutions. Just like an awful lot of web pages suck, because the "designer" hard-coded the text in fixed pixel sizes that looked just perfect on his monitor, but on anything bigger than 1024, it's microscopic and illegible. And they were tooo dogmatic about what is "right" to allow me to adjustt text size in my browser.

I suggested that you TEMPORARILY change the resolution in order to deal with the CUI. That would imply putting the resolution back when you're through with that task. I didn't say you should suffer in misery forever at a lower resolution. Aside from waiting for Adesk to reprogram the stinking thing (annd so far they don't seem to be exactly improving it) I don't know what other workaround to suggest.

Yeah, I was using a 1600 resolution even back on the 17 monitors. As you say, "Yes it takes some fiddling, and some things are less than perfect." For AutoCAD, it's nice to see very fine lines, and it's convenient for editing large graphic images.

However, I don't necessarily agree that "the overall results are well worth it." That's an opinon. I dropped my insistence on maxing out the resolution when I was in a job where "my" computer or monitor changed at least once a week, if not daily. It got to be more of a pain than it was worth to twiddle every little thing to suit my exact perfect preferences, over and over again. Eventually I quit worrying about using "my" perfect text editor for lisp, "my" favorite custom fonts, and all the other baggage that I was having to lug around. I got used to working a lot closer to OOTB status, and spent more time working than tweaking. My computer situation is more stable now, but I've lost my taste for fine-tuning every little thing.

Just as you said in jumps on resolution, 100 to 300 dpi was a big deal. 300 to 600, not so much. On a 16" or 17" CRT wiith a big dot pitch, any improvement in the fineness of an Acad line was a big deal to me. On a 19" to 21" fine-grained monitor, a 25% improvement in the thinness of a line just isn't something that I'm going to pick fights over. In fact, it reallly "doesn't seem like a lot" to me, particularly if it comes at the cost of having to "fiddle" with a bunch of little things to get a result that's "less than perfect."

Over the years I've generally used a higher resolution at work, where CAD is mostly what I do, and a lower setting at home, where I do entirely different things. There's a reasonable compromise between picture quality and convenience. If a web designer used tiny text, and didn't give me the choice of controlling text size through my browser. I have no choice but to TEMPORARILY change screen resolution if I want to read his page.

On my digital camera, there are times when I TEMPORARILY lower the resolution for various legitimate reasons. One being that doubling the resolution quadruples the area and storage space needed. If I'm away from base camp and nearly out of space, I'd rather have four bracketed exposures of a sunset at a lower res than one high-res shot that may or may not turn out well.

You're welcome to have any preference you want.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for your understanding reply(&this msg is with no sarcasm) you are right I do need to cut back on the caffeine but….. I luv my grandee white mocha americano's 3/4 full LONG shots, leaves so little room for water, it's basically straight espresso and lots of sugar.

I do have the luxury of the same computer for years, and use a tablet with mapping which doesn't like temporary resolutions switching so much, so @work I stick to 1600x1200, but at home I do the same as you and often do switch resolutions.

You got the brunt of my tirade, but this is an open forum for all to read and maybe hopefully some of the bean counter‘s that try to save a penny by providing such low end hardware to the cad operators, and even Autodesk for still designing around such low end hardware, will also read this.

Cripes $3K sw used by atleast a $30K operator on what a 17” monitor running at 1024x768, yikes.

[Anonymous]

Workspaces need major improvement.
Exporting them and importing them double the standard ACAD toolbars if trying to use the cui.

If the main goal of using the cui was to prevent replication of existing toolbars, then it isn't working.

It would be a nice enterprise enhancement if it would not duplicate standard ACAD toolbars but merely switch them on as indicated by the workspace rather than making an entire copy.

Also it would be nice to have the toolbars dialog option back as a shortcut for displaying as well as handling default screen locations with a cui when loaded..

[Anonymous]

I cannot think of anything more convoluted and ridiculous than creating a new button. I run the risk of ruining my local acad.cui because it won't let me create a new command and button anywhere else. This cui does not add features to help manage but rather confuse and block productivity.

[Anonymous]

CCMoor wrote:
> I cannot think of anything more convoluted and ridiculous than creating a new button.
> I run the risk of ruining my local acad.cui because it won't let me
create a new command and button anywhere else. This cui does not add
features to help manage but rather confuse and block productivity.

One way that seems to work:
create an enterprise .cui file, and have the acad.cui etc as partials to
that. Create another fresh, empty .cui file and use it as your main .cui
file, where you can play around with your customisations without
affecting the acad.cui file.
Be sure to explicitely define at least one workspace and set it current,
or the results are occasionally unpredictable.

--

[Anonymous]

I have 8 enterprise custom files.
I found I can create them as new from the enterprise custom file. The CUI just seems to only go so far before the windows stop responding to updates. It had moved the file but the interface needed restarted to show it.

[Anonymous]

How about being able to drag and drop menu buttons from the CUI to a pallette. While I am at it, it would be really nice if it could edit pallettes and make pallette editing simpler too.

[Anonymous]

Just in case anyone from Autodesk is still following this thread (and I hope
you are), please refer to the following thread for more discussion on this
topic:

http://discussion.autodesk.com/thread.jspa?threadID=490015

Many thanks to jacoppinger for the time that he undoubtedly invested in
this.

--
Ralph Sanchez
http://www.texupport.net


wrote in message news:5146408@discussion.autodesk.com...
Hello,

We are looking at ways to improve and enhance the CUI Editor in AutoCAD. As
a customer, what improvements would you like to see with CUI?

Thanks in advance for your input!

Doug Cochran
Autodesk, Inc.

[Anonymous]

That is a great post for customization.
Excellent recommendation.

[Anonymous]

CCMoor said the following On 8/29/2006 12:08 PM:
> I cannot think of anything more convoluted and ridiculous than creating a new button. I run the risk of ruining my local acad.cui because it won't let me create a new command and button anywhere else. This cui does not add features to help manage but rather confuse and block productivity.

Amen.

Very good points.

--
R.K. McSwain
http://rkmcswain.blogspot.com

[Anonymous]

I usually open 2 instances of CAD to do this after I hit apply, I open a new instance. But I also have dual 20" LCD's on every workstation so it isn't so hard to manage, just less time to boot up AutoCAD than to open the CUI =P

[Anonymous]

My advice: Dump it! As a CAD manager I did not ask for it, wasn’t expecting it, and have found it a huge hindrance to distributing a company specific, standard user interface.

Also, years I ago I witnessed standalone AutoCAD setups, where a user less skilled at customizing struggled with a task, while a coworker smugly guarded routines he had created. When given the opportunity to setup a CAD department, I targeted this from the beginning and setup a shared menu on the network with each new employee getting their own toolbar. Users can add whatever customization they want to their toolbar, and the next time another user reloads the menu (i.e., opens a drawing), they are able to share in the wealth. For groups of up to a couple of dozen users, this has worked well. Admittedly, you probably don’t want to do this with a hundred users.

In my experience tool palettes have not been accepting of this method. If you share a tool palette, the last one to exit AutoCAD has their settings saved, regardless of whether any changes were made or not.

And now, shared menus (cuis) also are not forgiving. Again, it seems the last-one-out has their settings saved whether or not any changes were made. So if a user does customize something, it is wiped out by the other user who had AutoCAD open and closed it after the “customizer” closed their session.

So my complaints are:
1) I don’t see a way to whip up a common setups (profiles/cuis/workspaces/tool palettes) which I can easily distribute for AutoCAD, Map, C3D, LDT, and ADT. (BTW – I can no longer image a machine that has AutoCAD, Map, C3D, LDT, and ADT installed and expect it to work. Yes, we use network licenses.)
2) I don’t see a way to share items in such a manner that users can customize them, and have the changes available to other users. It simply seems whoever is last to exit, their settings are saved.

I have read the post at http://discussion.autodesk.com/thread.jspa?threadID=490015 but haven’t tried it yet. Even though it may bring us out of the woods, Autodesk should take note that it’s as simple as unraveling the coils of an anaconda. Simplicity seems to mean how quickly a user can drag and drop something, not how managers can efficiently push out company specific startups to their users. And forget about sharing customizations.

If I’m missing something, please educate me. Self educating just ain’t gettin’ me there.

[ehornig]

Could you add a stand alone utility that allows us to edit our master CUI files from outside of AutoCAD? To edit a file set up as an enterprise CUI, you have to set it to be your main, edit it, and then set it back. Which is a little cumbersome.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

"improve and enhance".... Please, if you insist on keeping on with the CUI system, get it to work, really work, be truly "bulletproof" before you propose to "enhance" it. The system is still very fragile, messy, subject to corruptions of every kind. Cui files fail to load / customizations get screwed up REGULARLY in our experience.

[tbushmaker]

Wow! I guess Autodesk employees on the AutoCAD team need to have thick skins (as opposed to those say, on the Revit team...)! You guys are merciless.

Long time user (since v2.6 wayyyyy back in high school), rare group participant. I always enjoy reading the banter and useful information/opinions from regular users (thanks for the help over the years, Paul Aubin!), but I think everyone is being a bit hard on the development team here (believe it or not, I actually read all 216 previous posts!).

I have done customizing up the wazoo and liked the MNU structure before, but I must say that I understand why Autodesk has chosen the CUI route and I agree with it. "One stop shopping" for all your customizing needs, although their first go at it was unpolished and incomplete.

Just upgraded 30+ users from ADT3.3 to ADT2006 last fall and the CUI was only marginally difficult to set up and get working properly, but since deployment it has been more or less bulletproof. The trick mirrors what "jacoppinger" outlined in the other thread. Really, the CUI was easy to get a handle on for us... truthfully we had much bigger problems getting the palettes to show properly and work for all users. Which brings me to my first request:

1. Please make the tool palettes part of the CUI, including groups and the ability to load different ones with different workspaces. I understand some degree of this has been done with 2007, but not appropriately or completely.
2. Please include the pgp alias editor and an easier toolbar editor.
3. Make the icon files consistently available, probably with a user-defineable network location! I rarely get little clouds, but sometimes do get blank spots.
4. Also get rid of acad.lsp and make all LISP routines loadable in the CUI.
5. For those who prefer more manual editing, make it a user-friendly (and "standardized") XML file that can be edited in Notepad without needing to be a rocket scientist.
6. Finally, though it is less of an issue for us since we don't need to invoke it often, reduce the launch time for the CUI editor, perhaps even making it a stand-alone item like the Content Browser.

Basically, we started with ADT.cui to make the Enterprise file and placed it on the network read-only. Then we added acad.cui, acetmain.cui, and our custom cui's (converted from old mnu files) as partial CUI's in the Enterprise file. Then we set the "main" CUI to be a blank Custom.cui on everyone's computer that currently contains their saved workspaces and custom toolbars and that's it.
I don't know if LDT has a specific issue that's different from ADT, but this setup has worked for us with no issues (including the mouse and OSNAP problems outlined by others). Most of our users that like to create custom toolbars have had little problem figuring out how to "drag and drop" in the CUI, even if it's a little less intuitive than the old way.

If there are issues, 99.9% of the time they can be solved by either reloading their workspace, or (rarely) reloading the standard profile from the network and then their workspace. We never reboot or have to relaunch ADT to get everything to work. And if I (one of two part-time CAD managers) need to change the Enterprise CUI, it's a simple matter to make it the main CUI on my workstation, make changes, and save it back to the network.

As for the possibility that a user could go into the network drive and "de-check" read-only on the Enterprise CUI file to make changes, well, that's discipline. We make it pretty clear that that part of the network is mostly off-limits (we let them create their own shared .ctb files, for example), and it hasn't been a problem. Anything we don't want them to change, we mark read-only. This goes for our LISP routines, custom blocks, palettes, etc. Then we don't have to bother with IT to set up permissions for specific directories.

If your users have a hard time creating custom toolbars, have them create palettes instead. We find that to be quite effective as well, and probably better in the long run.

In short, I applaud the AutoCAD teams for taking a risk to improve something that many users didn't think needed to be improved. Yes, it should have been tested more thoroughly, and no, it wasn't quite ready for prime time. This is a $3500 software package, San Rafael, not a $35 Office Depot special, and it should be FINISHED before shipping (you don't REALLY need forced annual updates, do you? Remember the good ol' days when you had 2 1/2 years to turn R13's ugliness into R14's bliss??).

BUT they should stick with it. Microsoft takes three tries to get something right. Let's hope 2008 is the year (almost) everyone's on board with the CUI. The current problems with it are perhaps indicative of the current "get it out the door and make money on subscriptions" mentality at the company, and are not limited to the CUI. On the other hand, I don't think it's deserving of all this vitriol either.

Thanks for letting me ramble in one of my rare posts!! Happy AutoCAD (or ADT or LDT or whatever) -ing.

Bushwhacker
ADT2006, Revit 9

[Anonymous]

An excellent post. Thank you for taking the time to compose it.

--
R. Robert Bell

[Anonymous]

I gave up on reading all the posts and so I do not know if these items have already been brought up.

1- Copy and paste between items (like palette to palette).

2- palette multiple item select and common property editing (such as several insert symbol items being selected and being able to change them all to color bylayer at once).

3- palette group one pick buttons or have more than one palette group anchored (multiple anchors preferred).

4- Ability to use flyouts in the palettes (palettes are so much easier for me to see and use than tool bars).

5- Under all commands have the ability to view currently unused commands and being able to delete more than one at a time (thanks for the inability to delete the used ones).

Thanks for asking, I much prefer giving suggestions this way than a rigid Q&A like "help shape autocad." I found that many times in the rigid system I would like to say "I don't care about what you are asking about."