Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
Where are the improvements?
mark_biasotti
Member Posts: 123 ✭✭✭
Late next week we come up to the 2 month mark that Onshape was released for "Pre-Production". My question is: where are the improvements? The promise of Onshape is that it could provided a platform that could be updated daily but after 2 months, I have seen very little evidence of that. Having been in the role of CAD software development, I can understand that there are some improvements that require a lot of thought, testing and reiteration, maybe more so after customer feedback. But then there are other improvements that are pure "no brainers" that are viewed as necessities that are required to foster the bigger improvements.
I think that I am only expressing what others here are thinking; Onshape, I'm loosing confidence in you.
Mark
I think that I am only expressing what others here are thinking; Onshape, I'm loosing confidence in you.
Mark
0
Comments
The issue for OS is simply that Fusion360 is a far more rounded cloud tool. That is the app it will be compared with when it sticks its head above the parapet. Aside from history, fusion is a far better modeller, and at $300 a year, price competition will not be the issue.
In order to get users to move away from their core CAD tools you need to offer an irresistible package which in this day must combine lower costs, some vastly better workflow and at least equivalence of the modelling tools. If not, people will stick with what they have and know well.
https://forum.onshape.com/categories/recent-improvements
Here I am outlining many of the improvements we are pushing and are doing so in a very iterative fashion. I understand everyone has weighted their most important improvements and we are going after improving Onshape quickly. More to come and this is what pre-production is all about.
If you have some specifics that are critical to you, please submit them to me so I can get those in front of development. Feedback in the ? menu will be the best way. ~Lou
I agree with Kevin that -to attract users switching from another CAD infrastructure- first and foremost the modeling tools & workflows should be up to scratch. Right now, I'm having a hard time convincing people to try out Onshape, because of the lack of core modeling tools and drawings.
Sure, the roots of the 'PDM' functionality are already impressive, but I think most people will only care for it after they feel confident about the modeling aspect.
No greater frustration than not being able to do things (or having to do things in a too convoluted way) that you can do very easily in your main CAD app.
Dries
First thanks for the feedback.
Let me shed a little light on what is not visible to you guys right now. As Lou shared, we have been updating the software regularly. And actually this thread in a way reflects exactly what we have done. That is you didn't even know did you? No disruptions, no broken models no issues. It just worked... Everybody is on the same version. That is one of the most important things we are doing. We need to have an established a track record of smoothly and transparently pushing updates to you making sure models never break etc... . There was a lot of changes in these updates. Mark you well know that using any other product, such a thing would have been... well lets just say, "rather disruptive"
Kevin you mentioned Fusion. and no doubt, after +8 years its finally getting some breadth. But one thing Fusion never did was what I just described above. Fusion routinely breaks, routinely requires updates, re-installs... breaks models etc..... So FWIW, Onshape is something very different. You can judge how important that is. But we are doing this now, so that this product truly scales in a massive way.
The pace of customer facing development is exactly what we planned this stage of Pre Release. But clearly we need to learn how communicate better. Since we seemed to have set the wrong expectations with you so that you are left feeling things are not what you anticipated.
I have a very different perspective on things. But then again I get to see a lot of new stuff almost everyday. The team is rapidly adding all needed things. Also, if it not crystal clear, drawings are a very intensive focus for us. This is something we have not exposed to you yet either. But when it is turned on it will mark a very significant improvement.
The fact is there is no way a brand new product can suddenly match capabilities of products that have had +20yrs of development. So I think the most important piece of information to pull from this thread is to help us identify what exactly what is the realistic gap between current capabilities today, and it being ready to use in production.
Dries setting aside, sheet metal, and 3D sketch. Since neither of these were ever hinted to be part of our initial release. If those are truly a go no go. then the product is not going to be ready for you no matter what we do. I would be surprised to find 3D sketch is a show stopper, since 3D sketch is barely used in SolidWorks by users. i
So I hear you say, that the modeling tools are a prerequisite for you to then take advantage of differentiators like branching and merging, sharing, multi user capabilities?
I would really like to get the stone cold, realistic list things we need to do now. From this thread I see 2 so far
- Helix
- Thin feature
Last rest assured this is going to be a rocketship. But we are still filling the tanks and setting up some of gantry... stay tuned....By the way, it's called a "rolling release". My Linux operating system, ArchLinux, uses a rolling release method where a new OS release and any program can be updated without ever having to restart my computer.
Thanks for the response. Yes, it's nice that you are updating frequently and we aren't even aware of it but I could turn that back on you and say that the reason we are not aware is because we don't see any significant improvements in the product and therefore assume nothing is being done. I guess I thought that there would have been more over a two month period. In fact, I would have been satisfied with even smaller ones but I haven't even seen the small ones (not being able to reference or dimension to planes in a sketch, can't delete a spline point, 2nd direction extrude, etc.) show up.
I Agree with Kevin and Dries that users will seek out (and expect) to have the core modeling and documentation tools to accomplish their designs before they ever discover the more novel aspects of OS, like Branch and Merge, but so far, in my opinion, OS has not reached the threshold of what I need in the most basic of CAD modeling systems.
So, without further debating, here is my top 12 in priority: (sorry I just couldn't do it with 10)
1st - Mass Properties (including a simple list of assignable materials and customizing the attributes to make your own.)
2nd - A simple drawings package - with dimensions, tables, notes annotations etc.
3rd - Different visualization types besides shaded; wireframe and hidden line views (important when creating features and referencing geometry that otherwise can not been seen in shaded view.)
4th - in-context modeling of part studio/s in the assembly ( this is essential for designing machines around stock parts.)
5th - Default planes that you can actually see and dimension and reference to in a sketch.
6th - Better selection mechanism - ( i.e. when you try to select a face, you select the plane that that is in front of it instead.)
7th - better sketch contraint visibility and control (like being able to see them all at once would be a good start)
8th - up to offset end condition
9th - 2nd direction extrude (not having this omits a key design intent that is extremely important to users: extrude thru all in both directions.)
10th - Ellipse Sketch entity
11th - Derived parts
12th - sketch Pierce and Symmetry constraints
It was difficult to formulate this list because there are about 50 that I can think of that are necessary for my machine design (i.e. Holes and Toolbox etc.) but these are the Twelve that I vetted out of that 50, that really should be there. In my humble opinion, 1st thru 7th are what really must be there, and 8th thru 12th are not absolutely essential but quite painful to work around.
Mark
I congratulate @mbiasotti for his efforts in crystalizing 12 prioritized requests. Not an easy feat!
I will try to come up with an equally scrutinized list by the end of the day.
Dries
Dries
I am not trying to imply 3D sketch is unimportant. What I meant to say, is as a percentage, a low percentage of users ever used it in SolidWorks. We used to measure these types of things very closely. Clearly it is super useful for weldments and for sweeps, wires, tubes lofts etc...
So it will be there...
For me this is always the toughest part of developing a new product. You want to do everything. But you can't
The more we can get from you guys, the top list things keeping you from production, the better. Mark's list is extremely valuable to us right now.
Joe
During this last development sprint, we knowingly deployed additional resources to focus on some global system infrastructure improvements as well as going back and putting a renewed emphasis on quality/bug resolution.
Keep pushing us and keep the enhancement requests coming - Onshape has and will continue to respond!
John
- Import export 2D DXF this is a make or break with me and the laser cutting I do
- Cut and paste sketch elements
- Box select
- Dimension input to take fractions
- Dimension input to take simple math functions +,-,*,/
- Dimension input to be able to be linked to other dimensions and be able to use in equations
- Import and export of 2D DXF
- Assembly patterns
- Did I mention import and export of 2D DXF?
Those are the core of what I need to put this into immediate production mode for me. Please free me from the tyranny of the software I am chained to. I would gladly drop everything for a system that may not have all the bells and whistles that is stable. So far OS is rock solidLearnOnshape facebook group
I did want to point out that per your item #7, we actually do already let you see all the constraints in a sketch. Look in the Sketch dialog box for the "Show Constraints" checkbox.
Clearly we need to also do a better job communicating what we already do -- we invite suggestions for how to improve this as well.
1/2 down, 11 1/2 to go. Stay tuned, we are working hard.
- Robust drafting environment (dimensions, tolerances, GD&T, annotations, tables, BOM, NO OVERRIDE DIMENSIONS!! SW has this in a way too convenient place, which causes some people to abuse it... which causes other people to bang their heads against their desks...)
- Engineering/Design features (extrusion ‘up to’ or ‘up to offset’, thin feature with auto-filleting, hole wizard, ribs)
- Equations/Expressions (mathematical operations, referencing other dimensions, equations on sketch and part level)
- Intelligent patterns (driven by equations or ‘up to’ reference for spacing/number of instances) on Part Studio level
- Intelligent assembly patterns (driven by Part Studio patterns)
- Section views in Part Studios and Assemblies (with possibility to exclude Parts from sectioning)
- Sketch dimensions and constraints to datum geometry (notably: datum planes)
- Sketch Symmetry and Pierce constraints
- In-context modeling in assembly
- A means for Part Studios to drive ‘children’ Part Studios (so in short: a master modeling or derived part approach)
- Direct edits of imported geometry, without history recording (when blocking out ideas, based on existing designs without worrying too much about proper modeling strategies)
- Quickly tag versions as: idea, concept, prototype, manufacturing...
DriesBut all I can say is think back to 1996/97 when I first came across SolidWorks at a tiny little stand at a trade show in England. We went with the aim of buying a system. We started with Mechanical Desktop...which was...well less said the better. Then we found Varimatrix, where they had a whole auto IP on display and monster 3D model running on a swanky Unix box. Cool! Only £15k.
Then we discovered a new app called Solid Edge...running on Windows NT...3D shaded graphics, even managed to model a simple part in 10 mins from zip. Then....
Then we bumped into a tiny little stand from NT CADCAM running a new app called SolidWorks. Jason modelled our parts and assembly while we watched, did some drawings, then edited the models and updated the drawings...jaw.hit.floor.time.
My point is, SolidWorks, out the door did everything most of us needed to do. Bob Clements at NT told me once that SolidWorks sold itself...just get a foot in the door to do the demo and watch the chequebook come out. That is what Onshape need to get back...that simple awestruck moment that makes us reach for the credit card.
Now 2014 is not 1996/7. Most have seen 3D CAD. Most have used it. For most, Onshape will be a second or third or more CAD system. When SolidWorks appeared it was actually a very complete system. Onshape needs to be at least as capable. There is one chance to get this right. No pressure!
Wow, forgot about box select, good catch Ben. Can't imagine using any graphics software without box select....
I really feel for you guys (OS team) and CAD developers generally ... you are trying to make 'universal tools' for as wider audience as possible.
My simple answer is to continue the good work and trajectory that solidworks originally took. Now whilst the solidworks trajectory appears to drooping, possibly out of control - (the DS strategy seems to be all over the place - I mean why is mechanical conceptual and design conceptual not being integrated, and why for example was the top 10 request only start line by centre !! ... hello ? loosing the plot ? )
OS has made a great start - I LOVE the clear elegant interface, browser based is OK with me, not too keen on sharing (small company so not target market ;-( ) .. I just cannot wait for a full complement of elegant modelling tools - tools to make any shape. I dont care if its a 'surface' or 'solid' or T-Spline or mesh, or whatever the underlying code is .. I just want to design (in my case) consumer products. Here the market demands better, faster, cheaper, cooler - generally smoother, cleaner and using tools traditionally called surfacing.
So my single wish (for now) is..
Easy, and powerful 'surfacing' neatly integrated.
..... I loved using Catia's 'Imagine & shape module' on a huge automotive client's cad monkeys rig. The user had no idea of the power ( or the cost !! ) of his catia seat ..... (This seems to be a typical result of the CAD industries focus on big multi seat companies. But less interest in smaller cos where there is often more advanced use of the cad, but less money.)
I guess the biggest market for you guys and all CAD vendors are such big companies..... Multiple seats of CAD and much more 'design by team' ? ... [hence emphasis on 'share' ] . So I am guessing we small companies, although pushing the boundaries, by comparison are of less $$ interest ? .... Although I would suggest LOTS of small companies and individuals using CAD is a potentially an even bigger market ..
My humble recommendation is to ignore the masses asking for 'faster horses'. (to paraphrase Henry Ford on rejecting feature based market research from existing users). So, No tweaks to make OS more like 'Horse A', its selection techniques and lines drawn from centre :-) ... BUT go-ahead, develope a modern car .....
its already off to a good start - a damn fine chassis :-)
Thoughts ?
Twitter: @onshapetricks & @babart1977
LearnOnshape facebook group
Twitter: @onshapetricks & @babart1977