Rhino 6 Thoughts


#1
  1. Improve and optimize all the commands to work better and faster with more options - no need to have more commands!
  2. Rhino is lacking in internal rendering and TEXTURING - better and faster Neon + materials and options like in Flamingo! Developing separate rendering plugins like Flamingo and Brazil is a waste of resources - there is a huge competitions!
  3. Data management and organizations - this is a HUGE! Better block and group management, graphical tools for manipulating UserText, data extraction like in AutoCAD, tree like object representation - like SketchUP’s outliner and etc.
  4. Better detailing and dimensioning - also HUGE! It is time to move on - live connection between 3D and 2D representation - the new version of BricsCAD will have this - What’s New In BricsCAD V14

What are Your thoughts?


(Willem Derks) #2

Hi,

1: It is a generalization wanting to condense functionality into the same or even less commands.
However my experience is that in practice when trying to come up with examples it is not so obvious.
Can you provide examples of what commands you think can use more options, work faster en better?

-Willem


#3

Just a couple:

… to be continued :smile:


(Pascal Golay) #4

Hi CadMaster - it is true that Rhino has too many commands, in a way. On the other hand, some of the seemingly obvious ways to combine them turn out to be rather problematic - for example, there are several commands to Untrim faces - Untrim, UntrimAll, UntrimBorder, UntrimHoles.

The first accepts specific edge curves - one click per edge or chain, while the last three will act on trimmed faces as a whole, including multiple pre-selected objects. So combining the first with the last three is very awkward. Now, can you combine the last three? Yes, but what is gained? Every time you run the ‘parent’ command you’d need to look at the command line and check that the correct option is active- holes, border, all… so, easy to make a mistake and it takes your attention away from the screen. So, in response, you might make three macros to run the three possible options… which gets you back to three commands.

I do think it would be good to streamline, no question, but there is actually limited scope for this in the current system it seems to me. I think more, and more creative, use of dialog boxes might help for the non-dash commands.

-Pascal


#5

my thoughts:
1# add a solid operation kernel,to improve fillet command performance,and add replace surface,delete surface .etc feature.
2# a far more fast and smooth display engine,and mesher.


#6

Trying to “simplify” things by just shuffling what used to be different commands into options was tried a long time ago and proven to not simplify anything and actually slows you down and increases the probability of errors. The only way to actually simplify things is to actually cut things out, which of course no one is going to accept, unless you come up with advanced new tools that obsolete large swaths of the existing toolset. I’m not sure what those might be since Rhino basically exists thanks to other software developed (over what is now decades) on the premise that a small number of “intelligent” tools are all you need.


#7

Sorry I have been misunderstood - I guess because of my bad english!
I mean - instead of adding a bunch of new commands to concentrate on improving and extending the existing commands. I prefer 10 commands working better, than 20 half-working.


(Willem Derks) #8

Hi Cadmaster,

I see and yes I agree. There is need to improve and fix existing functionality before even more semi-working features are added. Just a few examples:

  • mesh booleans work only half of the time
  • offsetsrf/shell is producing incorrect results WITHOUT noticing the user (eg non-solids)
  • make2D is slow and incorrect at times (I know this is being worked on for V6)

I agree that V6 should overall be more robust than more feature-rich.

-Willem