The main issue is that many long-time Rhino users expressed their thoughts and gave ideas how to improve the existing tools plenty of times during the years, yet, the developers don’t see those suggestions as viable and worth the time to actually implement them.
I can mention 5 of the most crucial features that Rhino lacks in year 2024:
-
“Explicit control” inside the main surfacing tool. This is extremely important and discussed many times during the last 10 years or so, but even the future Rhino 9 will skip it, AFAIK.
-
Individual options for U and V directions for the “Match surface” and “Blend surface” tools. Currently, there is a single, common option for the UV direction in the “Match surface” tool (Match target isocurve direction) that makes Rhino confused which direction to use, ultimately leaving the user with an ugly piece of garbage surface, because it applies both directions simultaneously.
-
“Match surface” does not have a “Keep flow” option to prevent the undesired distortion of the control polygon along the UV direction while using G2 curvature matching. It must be able to optionally match to the normal direction only, even at the cost of losing the true G2 continuity.
-
“Blend surface” is incapable to match to the target surface’s side edges direction (when the target edge is trimmed) to produce a smooth transition.
-
Converting surfaces into single-span degree 5 surfaces results into an ugly and unusable output surface with heavily chaotic orientation of the control points.