@RIL you are deeply misguided. I don’t believe for one second that I’m the only person affected by poor usability and sloppy QA at McNeel. If those things are done properly, customer support doesn’t even enter the picture. In this case, there are two flaws built in that everyone has to cope with: 1) the Yak dialog losing focus and becoming inaccessible and 2) no obvious. easy way to remove a plugin. From what I can see so far, these are the tip of the iceberg for upgrading to R6.
I might well be. Anyone with any self distance would be open for such a possibility, and so am I.
But let me be clear about one thing. I really didn’t try to be funny. I tried to hint other readers of this thread to not take all the rantings too seriously, and in doing so I didn’t want to directly hurt you.
I think the Rhino developers are doing a fantastic job. They are obviously working very hard on fixing any issues. And none of the mistakes (there will always be some) are directed at any one person.
It is an open strategy from Mcneel to develop this product tightly together with the users, taking advantage of a very efficient testing strategy - namely users. If this had not been an open strategy it would be much different. I’ve done complex design and development too, and I know what extensive lab testing means. Short version:
It means, Far from enough. You have tested only what you have tested. Not more. Period.
Not more. Even in the most extreme cases, the test cases which you come up with in the lab, only using your imagination, is far from enough. Far from enough. But this is a reality which is self evident only for people who have dealt with big and really complex software projects.
Rhino developers are more than helpful when issues arise, and they are doing a very very good job. And they keep their calm (at least on the forums… 
)
// Rolf
Out in the coding fields I am this
Unless you’ve read my resume, you have no idea what experience I have with large, “really complex software projects”. Short answer: quite a lot. Using your entire customer base for beta testing is inconsiderate and irresponsible. I found both of the errors mentioned in this thread on my first attempt to use them.
I would have bet you did even if you had not told the world.
I have also never discovered a software bug before I tried using the buggy functionality the first time. 
// Rolf
Bug off, bub.
// Rolf
It looks like that bug is about to eat you alive.
@nathanletwory, I want to say one more thing… For me, and probably others as well, upgrading to R6 means buying a new, more powerful computer. That in itself is a stressful and exhausting experience, from setting up networking to CAREFULLY migrate files from old laptop to new, installing backup and Norton Security, commonly used apps, email, etc., etc. Each of these things can present its own arcane obstacles (Windows administrator permissions, erroneous “Subscription expired” messages, etc.) that become an endless series of time consuming tangents.
Actual work on my own CAD/GH project ground to a halt last week when I started this process, Starting another day with three hours of nonsense related to evaluating a plugin install feature (Yak) was yet another derailment that I could have happily done without. When I’m encountering R6 bugs and usability mysteries at virtually every turn, it’s a fair question to ask “Why weren’t these problems found and fixed before this code was released?” The notion of using customers as “a very efficient testing strategy” (@RIL’s words, not yours) is utterly absurd. That’s not what average customers sign up and pay for.
Unless your old computer was 32-bit or pre-Windows 7, do you really need a new one? Rhino6 is supposed to have faster display on the same hardware as Rhino5. Other than that the code base is pretty similar, R6 shouldn’t require more memory or more cpu cycles to achieve the same thing R5 did.
Sure, some new features such as raytraced display mode may be very slow, but you don’t have to use them, just like you didn’t use them on Rhino5.
The hardware upgrade was definitely necessary for me since I have “only” six GB of memory on the old laptop (“8 GB memory (RAM) or more is recommended”). It did not run 64-bit Rhino well at all and in general, was too slow for serious rendering work. I never even considered trying to run R6 on it, in part because I’ve seen indications on this forum that R5 and R6 don’t play well together on the same machine - unless one is willing and able to deal with conflicts between the two.
Hi Joseph,
I’m replying in this topic thread because only @nathanletwory, @RIL and @DavidRutten are contributing.
This to prevent less frequent users having to read this.
I read almost all new topics that come in at this discourse “forum” and for some time now I feel the need to have a conversation with you about how your replies come across to me. Not to berate or chastise -let me get that straight- but to provide feedback from my viewpoint. An attempt to give you insights that might enrich you.
You provide very valuable feedback on Rhino and GH and you are helping many users with good and solid replies on an almost daily basis. Your background in programming has proven helpful for many users coming in from the modeling-side of Rhino.
What I do notice however is that your writing tone often comes across as somewhat condescending. New ignorant users often get a reply from you that can be interpreted to have a hostile undertone. Instead of a welcoming undertone.
I don’t think it is your intention to scare people away, so I want to let you know as it’s mainly with your writing style that I get that feel and not with others’.
As for this topic where you share your thoughts on McNeels QA process as you have done before, I don’t see why you come in at such an offensive angle. Do you expect you will get better support and a better product, because you express your anger and frustration that way? To me it comes across as ranting and blowing off some steam.
My impression on McNeel and it’s developers is that they have a very open and professional attitude towards constructive feedback. They go out of their way to provide solutions and feedback on a personal level to anyone willing to ask a question in any tone. And it’s a good thing to do so as their software products are far from perfect. Although most software is not perfect, I guess the difference is that the software from McNeel is somewhat more ‘open ended’ than comparable software from other companies. This gives McNeel the burden to deal with issues like the one in this topic. However I think we as users should realize this and deal with it, in return we get cutting edge software at a bargain, with personal support from the developers themselves.
I wonder if it’s your intention to question the sanity and well being of these developers, while at the same time asking them for their support on a personal level.
Last but not least you should realize you are
Your view on the matter is fundamentally different from the user-base mean view. So you are far more likely to run into these type of issues as you are exploring the outskirts and crevasses of the software.
Kind Regards,
-Willem
Greetings @Willem,
This is a very puzzling post. Are you suggesting that this thread has now become private somehow? Visible only to four (now five) people?
I’m obviously not employed by McNeel so is it really my job to be “welcoming”? I realized early on in my career that customer support is not my strong suit, and that’s basically what this forum is, isn’t it? A bunch of unpaid volunteers adding value to Grasshopper by assisting people with their models, teaching and of course learning in the process too. Over the course of four years, I’ve tried to be helpful and often succeeded. But yes, I know I can be abrasive when frustrated, which happens all too frequently with “new ignorant users”. I’m not going to defend or justify that response but try as I may (and I do try), sometimes all I can do is just ignore people completely (wish this forum had that feature!).
This week, since I started exploring R6, I have a whole new realm of frustration. It has been a deluge of glaringly obvious bugs, usability flaws and version incompatibilities that have me spinning my wheels in a helpless rage of contempt. I’ve written desktop applications for tens of thousands of users in my own company (30+ years ago) and web apps for hundreds of thousands at companies like Shutterfly, Sprint (LightSurf), Opsware (LoudCloud) and others. I’ve always understood who I was writing code for (not geeks!) and went above and beyond to empower average users, to not leave them feeling helpless and stupid (the way I’ve been feeling so far since starting to evaluate R6). What’s wrong with “ranting and blowing off some steam” when dealing with cumbersome technology that feels akin to the nightmare future depicted in the 1985 movie Brazil?
In the four years I’ve been using Grasshopper, I’ve seen very serious flaws go unfixed - for four years! That doesn’t give me confidence that all the flaws I’m seeing in R6 will be fixed soon, if ever. It’s much better for everyone (win-win) if an application doesn’t require much customer support than to just be good at responding to questions and explaining over and over again why it doesn’t work as expected.
I don’t think I’m more likely than anyone else to encounter bugs and usability flaws, but perhaps more likely to recognize them as such and to know from personal experience that they can be avoided by a different company culture that emphasizes quality user experience as much or more than technical features.
Seems like this exchange would have been more appropriate in a PM instead of drifting the thread even further?
regards,
Joseph
Hi Joseph,
What I mean is that this is a rather specific topic, not likely be completely read by many visitors, like it would be if it was about for instance dealing with large meshes or performing solid unions.
No not al at all your job, but my preference is that this community makes new or ignorant users feel welcome. I personally don’t like to see them immediately getting lectured on their ignorance after an honest question. We are dealing with all sorts of people with all sorts of (cultural) backgrounds coming here. I think it courtesy to give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
That is what I noticed and wanted to share my view on, I’m happy to see you are aware of it. I’m referring to both your very valuable input in this community as well as your sometimes agitated tone.
Nothing per se, what I think is wrong is when this gets directed to people personally and attacks with hyperbolic statements.
You see how the tone of the above statement is different from this one:
or this one:
I did not consider a PM, only until after your remark:
However I do not feel the need to hide this conversation from others to see, although it indeed goes way OT. My intention is to be constructive and also give opportunity for others to chime in and correct me if I’m wrong.
Also I feel a personal need to express this visible for those it concerns, not so much other users but more so for the developers, many of which put their hart and soul in this product and their support. I think they deserve much better than to get ranted on in this way.
Since they are in a different position than I am it’s much harder for them to stand up for this, it’s their job to deal with all users and give support to all equally. They are not in a position to tell people off when their behavior starts to deviate from being well mannered.
To summarize:
Among all the many different user here I find your tone of writing to stand out. I wanted to share this to make sure you are aware of it. Tone of writing can be very different from the intended tone without the writer being aware. You provide valuable input over here, sharing your expertise and much of your time without any obligation to do so. This stands out as well in a very positive way, I’d hate to have that tainted by a unintentional tone. Hence my initiative to share my point of view.
Thanks
Kind Regards
-Willem
The world needs more Willems!