Product reviews

unhandled

#21

Yes, there are definitely some eccentricities with Rhino, like FilletEdge, but those are things our people learn early in the process. We take advantage of the training material provided by Mcneel with new employees, for example, the “Advanced Filleting” tutorials.

image

There are only a few reasons that FilletEdge fails, so you model proactively to avoid these pitfalls. Of course, FilletSrf can always save the day when FilletEdge fails to work.

I remember when I first learnt Solidworks in 2006, and I wanted to add a 3mm fillet. It wouldn’t work, and I got a note popping up that said something like “try a different size”, Was that helpful? No, it was annoying. I needed a 3mm fillet, so back to Rhino I went and used FilletSrf to get the results I needed.

I can say that our people that learn both Rhino and Solidworks do comment how much easier Rhino is to learn and to be productive with.


#22

@DanBayn your informative answer highlights my point - you teach a collection of “good practice” methods and work-arounds. Solo learners have to discover these methods themselves.
Rhino’s tools are quite easy to discover via the tool pallets, but methods are not easily discovered… and Rhino is as much about finding methods as tools.
Your “good practice” method suggestions (e.g. use FilletSrf) would be much more accessible in-context, when FilletEdge has failed. Nobody’s suggesting a painful “clippy”, but a hyperlink to potentially helpful tutorial solutions would bridge the chasm for new users and be painless for experienced users


(Tom) #23

I think comparing CAD platforms is like saying oranges taste better as peaches. You simply cannot compare different fruits by objective criteria’s. What makes a banana a better fruit over an apple? If a customer wants applecake, you shouldn’t use bananas just because you like it better. A professional might add some rosins because he feels this is a good and affordable combination.
How can you compare Rhino with Catia? Some important CAD-platforms are even missing. And how can a Student review a software which costs 100000 $'s, by having a real world working experience of 2 weeks? I use Rhino as assistant and generative modelling software for about 6 years now, and I’m very happy with it. And even today I’m learning something new. However some comments like imprecise, steep learning curve, and high costs are simply wrong. But often, even in professional environments, some groundless preconceptions are still existing. Debates about CAD seems to be very religious these days.
At work I’m using Icem Surf and Rhino, very limited a modified Catia V5 and Alias. For Visualisation VRED, and for polygon modelling Maya. Instead of judging about differences, it would be nice to see at least a better interoperability. Rhino does a great job here. Another great thing about Rhino is its accessibly by code. Something other cad-platforms lack of. Because if you feel a feature is missing, and this feature is not so complicated, you can build it by yourself instead of complaining all day.


#24

I’ve done the occasional review (e.g. on G2 crowd). User reviews can be interesting as they tend to be short and either fully positive (which doesn’t really help) or pinpoint some of the limitations they encounter (which is good to know, as a prospective buyer).

Professional reviews are also in two categories: those who mostly repeat press releases (not that revealing) and those who go in depth, which often place the software against previous releases or compare against competitors (also in ways where limitations are shown).

As an investment in a certain product, such as Rhino, is expensive in time (learning, recovering older work, getting productive) and in license cost (which is not so huge with Rhino) people want to make the best decision.

So yes, if done well, I find them really valuable.


#25

nobody knows if the review has any value if they never experienced the software before.
relying on third words is of course the easiest way to “judge” - how “convenient” in a world full of options.


#26

Ben, for point clouds check the Arena plugin…
Massimo


(Hearnyacht) #27

well rhino may be ok for people who draw stuff, but for me i build stuff and rhino will not even develop a simple compound such as a flattened section, a quarter actually of a sphere, how many year , is it now, I, never buy unless you get this ACCURATE process under control, of coarse i can section the piece and take off offsets, which is tedious


#28

C1AFC400-1BC8-40EE-9724-A8A4CD936BFD


#29

Yes, moi !!
Thanks


(Graham) #30

Nobody replies for 3 months and then 2 ask at once! Moi aussi svp


(Sandy McNeel) #31

@claudiofeldman and @Dancergraham It’s been more like 10 months.

How many would you like? I can mail them to you, but they will be mailed and will be delivered very, very slowly. (Who know? It could take 10 months. :slight_smile:)


(Gustavo Fontana) #32

Never heard of it. Too busy doing work I guess.

I just reached out but I’m not sure they’l have the solutions I need. But some vendors will be in touch with me soon!


(Graham) #33

Could we have 5 ? Or maybe 6 if it’s in 10 months: we may have to grow if we have less competition from the UK after Brexit :wink:
Thanks!

Graham Knapp

CSTB

11 rue Henri Picherit

44324 Nantes

France

Graham KNAPP

Ingénieur Recherche et Expertise

CLIMATOLOGIE . AERODYNAMIQUE . POLLUTION . EPURATION

Tél (33) 2 40 37 20 45

Portable (33) 6 65 05 56 93

Fax (33) 2 40 37 20 60

graham.knapp@cstb.fr

http://recherche.cstb.fr/en/