It is not obvious, at least to me, that in the CurvatureGraph panel the new + and - icons are now the method for adding and deleting objects from displaying curvature graphs.
Work In Progress (9.0.25051.305, 2025-02-20)
Eww, those icons shouldn’t exist. Returning to this menu to add and remove curves is slow and dumb. Rather, Rhino should enhance the chaotic behaviors of curve graphs.
How is clicking CurveGraphs different from adding/removing icons? A micro enables users to turn it on/off. Additionally, this tool’s users are likely advanced and accustomed to its previous faster and more intuitive mechanism.
The change is in the contents of the panel, not how the panel is accessed. It is available when curvature graphs are displayed.
V8 and previous versions:
Sigh, it appears it has been. Those two small icons aren’t bold. I don’t understand why McNeel changed it to smaller icons because it increases the likelihood of clicking on the wrong position of these symbols. In addition, it destroys muscle memory.
- Previous Version: An ample space to click
- Current Version: ⅓ of clicking space
Which one would you prefer?
–
Another thing:
Get help and refresh symbols (oh my gosh…). But is it really necessary, since this component is already broken?
It’s a minor problem, though:
Select multiple curves(maybe one) and run the curveGraph command; the graph becomes outrageous.
I do not have any problems using CurvatureGraph. I do have to change Display scale on occasion.
Yes, that’s what I meant. 
You can blame me for this change and plan is that all analysis panels get this.
The reason I think this is a good change:
- Consistent with other panels. All panels currently have the logic that the addition of something is the first icon in the list
- takes less space
- once you learn once that + is to add objects, you don’t need to read anymore, since it will be used for all analysis modes.
Question: are the buttons in other panels also too small?
Plan is to make the size of top row icons in panels also customizable.
I personally have a hard time finding the right button in the big button panels:
2 Likes
The buttons are too small, and the mesh settings button is too generic.
The button colors are too muted but that seems to be the general theme of the V9 WIP. Perhaps it is the current trend/fashion/fad.
Also, the delay when hovering over the button before the text identifying the function appears is too long.
I like the new minimalist style also if I’ve to admit that it confused me at the first glance.
I can’t imagine how much hard is to change but maybe putting the button at the bottom would refer more to the older Rhino UI.
To me the upper part should be reserved to the most important option leaving the + - selection button at the bottom.
1 Like
They look modest. The Zebra panel ought to like the others.
I don’t agree with this, as mentioned, the top section of panels is where things get added, first button. Also imagine a docked setup like this:
Question is, are the buttons for the other panels also too small?
The buttons are not yet finalized, and with the recent color change these need to be tuned still.
I see that, they don’t seem to follow the tooltip delay setting.
RH-86256 Tooltip delay of panel buttons
1 Like
I see your point and I can agree with you but the Layers (and all the named xxx panels) have the button on gray background while the option/information on white background, inside a frame.
Maybe also Zebra &co should follow this: having the workable option into a white/dark background frame. ( I know I don’t like frame too)
What if the slider get a white/dark background ?
One thing that I find problematic is that the original large buttons have verb/object text that tells the user exactly what it is working on. The plus sign in your new button suggests that it adds something but gives no clue what.
I suggest you give some thought to the very naive new (or infrequent) user. You’ve been using Rhino too long.
1 Like
@Gijs Request for persistent pop-up floating panels including CurvatureGraph, Zebra, Emap, EdgeContinuity, DraftAngleAnalysis, PointDeviation:
Add a button which minimizes the persistant panel to the title only, and expands from the title only to the previous size. These persistent panels can become obtrusive, particularly when more than one is present (for example CurvatureGraph and CurvatureAnalysis) and I sometimes have to repeatedly move them out of the way.
2 Likes
→ RH-86269 Panels: Request: Collapse Floating Dialogs
1 Like
I get your point, but the same would be true then for all the other panels that have these buttons on top. Imagine that these would all be turned into large clunky buttons:
I think the problem is not with new users here, but with existing users.
Once you know + is for adding objects, you’ll never need to learn it again and read the button text.
Something like this is the plan: (the Zebra strips was an earlier sketch that is now a complete renewed tool)
4 Likes
This really good, 1st keep more consistently interface. I like it.
How this apply to layer or named views?
Do you think there’s the need to have the meshing parameter per tool and not as general option?
Old users will shout that this is a mandatory need but newbie would never discover this and having it as document property will let to save this option as base template.
Just to make sure we’re on the same page: the mesh settings are already shared between analysis tools.
So you mean that Mesh settings need a section for Analysis mesh parameters in Document properties, that the Mesh settings button on these dialogs link to?