Generic Pet Peeves

[Frederick_Law]

Back to the ipad, it's 10 years old. I just want to run the old software that was available for the device at the time it was current. Nothing fancy and its still a good and fast device with the few apps on it. I shouldn't have to "jailbreak" it. I just wan to install old apps on it like an mp3 player or book reader, pdf reader, etc.

Apple and Google only keep updated apps on App Store.
And they all built to specific OS versions. Old app won't work on new OS. New app won't work on old.

I can get Android App install package and run it to install.
Don't know if it could work on Apple. They might have blocked app install out of AppStore. Hence jailbreak required.
Apple don't want Grandpa installing bank draining App from email and sue Apple.
Jailbreak it and it's your problem.

Jailbreak, root is to unlock all protection so you can do anything you want. Legal and illegal.
Old Windows came with no such protections.

[jcapriotti]

I hate hackers and evil people in the world. Ever since our company decided to open our networks to global teams and vendors.... I have to "authenticate" multiple times a day on my phone. I feel like I'm wasting 5% of my day playing authentication roulette every single day of my working life.

[bnemec]

I hate hackers and evil people in the world. Ever since our company decided to open our networks to global teams and vendors.... I have to "authenticate" multiple times a day on my phone. I feel like I'm wasting 5% of my day playing authentication roulette every single day of my working life.


image.png

What if the companies selling the security services and products are hiring the hackers?

[SPerman]

I hate hackers and evil people in the world. Ever since our company decided to open our networks to global teams and vendors.... I have to "authenticate" multiple times a day on my phone. I feel like I'm wasting 5% of my day playing authentication roulette every single day of my working life.


image.png

About once a month I have to help one of our employees delete and create a new authenticator account. Because Microsoft.

[Frederick_Law]

What if the companies selling the security services and products are hiring the hackers?

They just have 2 jobs.
Security in the day.
Hacker at night.

[Frederick_Law]

About once a month I have to help one of our employees delete and create a new authenticator account. Because Microsoft.

All the security are good at locking accounts .....

from the user.

[KennyG]

I hate hackers and evil people in the world. Ever since our company decided to open our networks to global teams and vendors.... I have to "authenticate" multiple times a day on my phone. I feel like I'm wasting 5% of my day playing authentication roulette every single day of my working life.


image.png

It would be nice if everyone could centralize on one authentication app too. I currently have 3 I have to utilize.

[jcapriotti]

The hackers keep finding ways to get around it. First my password had to be 8 characters, then 8 characters with upper and lower case. then 10 characters, then 16 characters with at least 2 uppercase, 3 lowercase, 2 numbers, 6 symbols, 2 dwarven runes, blood type, with no English words or l33tsp34k.

[SPerman]

Just wait until the bad guys get access to quantum computers.

[Frederick_Law]

It would be nice if everyone could centralize on one authentication app too. I currently have 3 I have to utilize.

You need authenticate app to authenticate another authenticate app.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

The 2023-2024 Solid Edge interface. Just started using it and it's
Everything is so close to the same color

If only the marketing team wouldn't have gotten ahold of the interface...
I'm getting used to it though...

[bnemec]

The 2023-2024 Solid Edge interface. Just started using it and it's
Everything is so close to the same color
image.png
If only the marketing team wouldn't have gotten ahold of the interface...
I'm getting used to it though...

I read a while back they were aligning icons with NX. I wonder how many users that actually helps; how many use both systems and need the icons to look similar? I mean, they're vastly different systems, why need same icons?

[KennyG]

I read a while back they were aligning icons with NX. I wonder how many users that actually helps; how many use both systems and need the icons to look similar? I mean, they're vastly different systems, why need same icons?

It's bigger than just SE aligning to NX or vice versa... All Siemens PLM products are aligning to a consistent UI Standard which includes SE, NX, Technomatix apps, Simcenter apps, Teamcenter, Electrical products and the cloud apps (Share, Zel X). The idea is that if you want to use the "Window Area" command for example, it is a consistent icon across all products and the products all have a consistent look and feel. Some companies use multiple Siemens products, and a single user will have to do similar functions in all of them. You will see a mix of icon graphics coming from a variety of the apps as they are standardized.

In regard to Solid Edge AND NX, they are not "vastly" different. Both have the same fundamental MCAD commands and thus have a large command overlap. Apparently, there is a large subset of customers who use both interchangeably as Siemens sells a Mechanical Design Bundle that includes both licenses. Also, if you use SE with SE CAM Pro, SE CAM Pro is actually NX.

[SPerman]

Joints in Fusion 360 make no sense. How can you take something as simple as mating two components and make it so convoluted a person can't figure it out?

They've adopted a DSS type attitude of solving a problem that didn't exist, and then digging their heels in saying, "but its better, you just don't get it."

8 years later, and I still can't figure out how to mate 2 components together.

When we started Fusion, one of the areas that we decided to try to improve over more traditional CAD software was the area of assembly modeling. Customers new to CAD often struggle with such abstract and mathematical concepts as "flush" and "mate" for describing relationships (especially kinematic relationships) between components. So, we decided to try to elevate the concept a bit to terms that are more familiar to mechanical designers: Joints. In our thinking, a "revolute joint" was more obvious than "Mate" between two linear entities that just happened to result in a circular degree of freedom. So, we decided to go "all in" on the joints approach, and not offer traditional assembly constraints at all. It was a bit of a risk. To our knowledge, no CAD software had tried this joints-only approach to assembly modeling.



In our (admittedly biased) opinion, this works very well for describing kinematic relationships. It seems pretty easy to created jointed component relationships. Especially in a top/down workflow, with "As Built Joint", I find it really easy to create most common mechanisms.



In the interest of honesty, where this approach still requires some tuning is in trying to position components rigidly with respect to each other. Fusion has always had Rigid joints, which definitely solves part of this workflow. But the joint positioning choices didn't always result in exactly the correct relative positioning of components relative to each other. So, over time we have added a few commands that help. One is Rigid Group. This command allows you to select a set of components and make them rigid with respect to each other in ther current positions. The Align command allows you to position components with respect to each other, by aligning geometry, and Move allows you to do more freeform moving of components. So, a very useful workflow is to use Align or Move to position components, then put them into a Rigid Group.



The other workflow is one that works well with top/down design. If you create components in a top/down design manner (for example, one sketch that is used to create 3 components), and you build these components in the orientation with each other that you want, then a simple As Built Joint with a type of Rigid works very well.



We are always looking for ways to improve workflows in Fusion. If you have ideas in this area, please let us know.



Jeff Strater (Fusion development)


Jeff Strater
Software Architect - Fusion 360

[KennyG]

Joints in Fusion 360 make no sense. How can you take something as simple as mating two components and make it so convoluted a person can't figure it out?

They've adopted a DSS type attitude of solving a problem that didn't exist, and then digging their heels in saying, "but its better, you just don't get it."

8 years later, and I still can't figure out how to mate 2 components together.

It's the other way to "innovate". Take something that already exists (spatial relationships) and couple it with an idea that few use (kinematics) and BOOM... a new innovation was born! Then defend it because otherwise there is nothing new.

Example: It's no longer a turning indicator, to simply indicate if you intend to turn left or right on your car. We have combined it with the compass and it's now a directional indicator that will indicate whether you are turning North, South, East or West in relation to your current direction of travel

[bnemec]

It's the other way to "innovate". Take something that already exists (spatial relationships) and couple it with an idea that few use (kinematics) and BOOM... a new innovation was born! Then defend it because otherwise there is nothing new.

Example: It's no longer a turning indicator, to simply indicate if you intend to turn left or right on your car. We have combined it with the compass and it's now a directional indicator that will indicate whether you are turning North, South, East or West in relation to your current direction of travel

Since it already existed and was working, this is a special kind of innovation, the disruptive kind.

[Glenn Schroeder]

I'm reviewing a report. It has "five feet tall," "9 feet tall," and "180 inches" IN THE SAME SENTENCE. So let's just arbitrarily spell out some values and use the numeral for others, and throw in one relatively large dimension in inches while smaller ones are given in feet. To top it off, the one in inches is shown as feet in the drawing, so the writer had to do math to come up with the value for inches.

[DennisD]

I'm reviewing a report. It has "five feet tall," "9 feet tall," and "180 inches" IN THE SAME SENTENCE. So let's just arbitrarily spell out some values and use the numeral for others, and throw in one relatively large dimension in inches while smaller ones are given in feet. To top it off, the one in inches is shown as feet in the drawing, so the writer had to do math to come up with the value for inches.

@Glenn Schroeder, we feel your pain.
That is annoying on so many levels:
A. Mixing words and numerals is just wr0ng!
2.000 The numerals should have been a three-place decimal.
iii. What did they have against Roman numerals!
m. Obviously this person had something against SI units.

[SPerman]

I received this email today:

"If I was on a 450 MX bike I’d be running a 56n/mm spring- on my E bike I run a 600 lb spring."



Not only did they switch from SI to Imperial, not only did they drop the "f" in lbf, they completely dropped the "/in" from the description of the spring. (Not uncommon, but still WRONG!) So instead of saying they are using a 600 lbf/in spring, they are saying they use a spring that weighs 600 lbm.

[jcapriotti]

Investigating a SolidWorks assembly performance issue:

800 parts
90 unique
30 sub-assy
9 unique sub-assy
860 top level mates

I was thinking, why so many mates? Fasteners mostly it turns out. There are sheet metal parts with lots of holes, some round, some hex, some key slots. The user built the parts with no pattern features at all. Just sketched 15 hexagons and cut extrude here, then sketched a coupled of key slots and cut-extrude there. Sketched some round holes and used a sketch pattern...then extruded everywhere.

Bottom line is, in the assembly, there are no fastener or part patterns, every single fastener was mated individually with at least 3 mates.

When we were just one division in the US designing a product, it wasn't too difficult to train and herd 40-60 designers and engineers. Now that our investor overlords have taken charge, and mandated that each division in 8 countries each design a part of the new product and share those pieces, modeling standards have went to the dogs. Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

[Glenn Schroeder]

Investigating a SolidWorks assembly performance issue:

800 parts
90 unique
30 sub-assy
9 unique sub-assy
860 top level mates

I was thinking, why so many mates? Fasteners mostly it turns out. There are sheet metal parts with lots of holes, some round, some hex, some key slots. The user built the parts with no pattern features at all. Just sketched 15 hexagons and cut extrude here, then sketched a coupled of key slots and cut-extrude there. Sketched some round holes and used a sketch pattern...then extruded everywhere.

Bottom line is, in the assembly, there are no fastener or part patterns, every single fastener was mated individually with at least 3 mates.

When we were just one division in the US designing a product, it wasn't too difficult to train and herd 40-60 designers and engineers. Now that our investor overlords have taken charge, and mandated that each division in 8 countries each design a part of the new product and share those pieces, modeling standards have went to the dogs. Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

That sounds awful. I'm so happy that I'm a one-man show here.

[VicFrauenfeld]

Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

Hang in there!

All I could think about was herding cats... I feel the same way sometimes, over 100 people in 4 countries in our PDM system.

[bnemec]

Investigating a SolidWorks assembly performance issue:

800 parts
90 unique
30 sub-assy
9 unique sub-assy
860 top level mates

I was thinking, why so many mates? Fasteners mostly it turns out. There are sheet metal parts with lots of holes, some round, some hex, some key slots. The user built the parts with no pattern features at all. Just sketched 15 hexagons and cut extrude here, then sketched a coupled of key slots and cut-extrude there. Sketched some round holes and used a sketch pattern...then extruded everywhere.

Bottom line is, in the assembly, there are no fastener or part patterns, every single fastener was mated individually with at least 3 mates.

When we were just one division in the US designing a product, it wasn't too difficult to train and herd 40-60 designers and engineers. Now that our investor overlords have taken charge, and mandated that each division in 8 countries each design a part of the new product and share those pieces, modeling standards have went to the dogs. Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

In my best sarcastic dumb voice: "These computers are so slow, why don't we buy better workstations, SW is so slow, we need better equipment."
In my no-tact, would someone else like to be, CAD/PDM Admin voice: "If you put half a thought into your modeling the software wouldn't be struggling to open/build your models."

[KennyG]

Investigating a SolidWorks assembly performance issue:

800 parts
90 unique
30 sub-assy
9 unique sub-assy
860 top level mates

I was thinking, why so many mates? Fasteners mostly it turns out. There are sheet metal parts with lots of holes, some round, some hex, some key slots. The user built the parts with no pattern features at all. Just sketched 15 hexagons and cut extrude here, then sketched a coupled of key slots and cut-extrude there. Sketched some round holes and used a sketch pattern...then extruded everywhere.

Bottom line is, in the assembly, there are no fastener or part patterns, every single fastener was mated individually with at least 3 mates.

When we were just one division in the US designing a product, it wasn't too difficult to train and herd 40-60 designers and engineers. Now that our investor overlords have taken charge, and mandated that each division in 8 countries each design a part of the new product and share those pieces, modeling standards have went to the dogs. Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

Especially when they don't have to answer to anyone for not following the standards and purposely "buck" them because they feel their way is better and their management agrees with them.

[AlexLachance]

I hate hackers and evil people in the world. Ever since our company decided to open our networks to global teams and vendors.... I have to "authenticate" multiple times a day on my phone. I feel like I'm wasting 5% of my day playing authentication roulette every single day of my working life.


image.png

Has this been resolved on your end? It shouldn't be happenning, once your connection has been authenticated, it shouldn't necessitate another authentication unless you log off. Sorry for the late reply.

We also have Authenticator around here, the only annoyance I have with it so far is the requiring authentication every time I log in to whatever, even e-mails and also, as @SPerman stated, transfering authenticator because people change phones over time and need to transfer it from one phone to the other.

[jcapriotti]

Has this been resolved on your end? It shouldn't be happenning, once your connection has been authenticated, it shouldn't necessitate another authentication unless you log off. Sorry for the late reply.

We also have Authenticator around here, the only annoyance I have with it so far is the requiring authentication every time I log in to whatever, even e-mails and also, as @SPerman stated, transfering authenticator because people change phones over time and need to transfer it from one phone to the other.

Nope, still the same for the most part.

[SPerman]

Investigating a SolidWorks assembly performance issue:

800 parts
90 unique
30 sub-assy
9 unique sub-assy
860 top level mates

I was thinking, why so many mates? Fasteners mostly it turns out. There are sheet metal parts with lots of holes, some round, some hex, some key slots. The user built the parts with no pattern features at all. Just sketched 15 hexagons and cut extrude here, then sketched a coupled of key slots and cut-extrude there. Sketched some round holes and used a sketch pattern...then extruded everywhere.

Bottom line is, in the assembly, there are no fastener or part patterns, every single fastener was mated individually with at least 3 mates.

When we were just one division in the US designing a product, it wasn't too difficult to train and herd 40-60 designers and engineers. Now that our investor overlords have taken charge, and mandated that each division in 8 countries each design a part of the new product and share those pieces, modeling standards have went to the dogs. Herding hundreds of engineers, in different countries, speaking different languages, is a near impossible task.

I started with SDRC-Ideas. AFAIK, it didn't have any pattern features for holes. We upgraded to NX, but we got minimal training. They sent the TeamCenter administrator to training and then he came back and reviewed the training material with us. I remember him mentioning hole patterns, but he didn't really emphasize how powerful it was. It wasn't until I was about a year into SW and had assemblies with 200 fasteners and 500 mates and a powerful system that told me to go get a sandwich that I realized there was a MUCH better way. I am living proof, many times over, that time invested in training WOULD have paid itself back multi-fold. Ain't nobody got time for that.

[AlexLachance]

Nope, still the same for the most part.

Have you looked with the IT guy of your company or the subcontractor who set it up? I know we have a few tweaks to do at first, but it didn't take too long to get everything running correctly.

[jcapriotti]

Have you looked with the IT guy of your company or the subcontractor who set it up? I know we have a few tweaks to do at first, but it didn't take too long to get everything running correctly.

It's a bit of a mess here. Everything IT has been outsourced in the last few years and since we are global, these activities are spread across multiple internal and external groups. Its difficult to find who to even talk to. I even talked with the few leftover IT guys we have locally and they just shrug and don't know what to do either. They've lost a lot of the control they had over this stuff.

[Frederick_Law]

Ain't nobody got time for that.

Current job.
When I said I need to train another designer, the boss said: "f*** it".

Well he's not really the boss anymore. He sold the company.