Oops, that was V8.
In V9 the same:
1 Like
yeah, so thatâs basically why Pascal wrote that YT, to consolidate the false color analysis + Zebra and Emap into one. In any case, I think there is still some plumbing to do before that YT can be addressed.
1 Like
@stevebaer , every analysis tool must retain its individual panel, because that makes it possible to apply different analysis tools to different models at the same time. This is extremely important for product design. 
Not by me.
What would be the actual effect of swapping the positions of Rotation and Frequency?
Easier and faster to reach due to the more natural position on top of the rest less used sliders.
In case that you or anyone else canât see a difference, thatâs perfectly fine, because swapping âRotationâ with âFrequencyâ will be equally good for you, and a billion times better for everyone who uses âRotationâ more often.
I never stated that would be the case. Panel visibility and analysis mode state donât need to be dependent on each other. We could wire up analysis mode panels in a way that they could keep the mode enabled even if the panel isnât active/visible when grouped together.
Itâs probably moot anyway at this time since this would be a pretty big project and I donât think we need to do it for v9.
1 Like
The current individual and independent analysis tools work flawlessly now. 
I see no reason to combine them, unless the idea is to have a common pop-up window with horizontal or vertical tabs consisting all analysis tools together. But this is something thatâs already possible thanks to the customization options of Rhino.
@bailbonds good to hear that these efforts make a difference. I think I know what you are referring to but still it is helpful if you can point out which panels have that spacing issue, thanks!