rectangle for three vertices: kiss?

[Tequila]

if in dassault or in siemens need a programmer on the heart of the program and do not want to move resources from other areas, you are sure that after 2 weeks they put it to work on the heart of the cad.

same thing for a designer.
will make a week between revisions and courses, but at the end of the second they already give him a project.

there will be a tutor or manager, but the insertion times are these.
training takes place in the field.

personal opinion: I have my doubts because or are you one that in a couple of weeks you show that you have the [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] on what you do, or you wait for your turn, and if you have the skills, go on, you stay there... but of course it always depends on the type of work and the difficulty.

 

[re_solidworks]

Gentlemen, I invite you to keep your tones on acceptable levels, warming is not necessary... .

 

[Tequila]

Gentlemen, I invite you to keep your tones on acceptable levels, warming is not necessary... .

I am quiet I have just posted a personal opinion :smile: but nothing provocative... Hi.

 

[geppetto]

My opinion is that it's not a bug.
my opinion is that the basic function made available by d-cubed is the acquisition of 2 points with x-y values and a third dimension.
then sw fails to pass at that stage the position of the click on the dimensional value.
only after the line is placed and you have all its points, you can add the bond.
This is my opinion of why.

with all the respect I owe to a person I don't know, I still have to preserve the frankness for which I try to distinguish myself.
Although I am a moral sw supporter and material I must say egregio soliduser that I feel too soft against sw and/or dassault. your attempt to justify a small "bug"in an explanation that could clarify the motivations but does not solve the problem, it also lays down some perplexity regarding your eventual interest.
This is my opinion, probably all wrong but such remains.
relatively then to what is behind software such as structure, organization etc.. There's something to say here, too.
when I chose sw I placed a question (to access the dimensions of a component in a practical, fast and usable way in the steps after the design) to which no one has yet been able to answer. some pious soul has broken a macro that only works in some cases, sw to create a button that does not allow to transfer the data and the undersigned realized that the solution was under the nose. in while, no technical sw wanted and/or ability to find the solution and many companies in my industry would ensure you sell the soul for this thing.
therefore the request is there but to dassault does not seem to interest.
companies are made by men and certainly also in dassault not all men do their duty diligently and/or are respectful of their customers. the customer is not just budget is something much more valuable than if badly cultivated can lead to conclusions not to read like this.
It forgives the light but I can't be different. There is fortunately the right of reply to which I am sure you will not want to give up.

 

[geppetto]

Gentlemen, I invite you to keep your tones on acceptable levels, warming is not necessary... .

caspiterina, too late... already posted. You know what?

 

[SolidUser]

I go in a hurry so I answer briefly and in part to these considerations, remembering that in the variant with the rectangle for the center and two points does not take the bond on the two final points. that is the command wrongs 66% of the inputs: two out of three.
But then the parallelogram captures all three constraints: alcohol:
My idea is that if you write a piffer command like that then to verify its basic functionality, it takes 10 minutes.
Some bugs that obviously validated those kissed commands were there. if they are not inepts it is evident that they have not taken the brigade to try the sketch draw on of the underlying geometry. at the end always of ineptitude is it.
to tonight the rest of the considerations... :wink:

Maybe you don't understand something.
Solidworks uses parasolid as modeling kernel and d-cubed for 2d commands, 2d constraints and axieme constraints.
This means that the rectangle commands in this case, the couplings and extrusions to make another example, are bees calls to siemens plm property libraries.
These libraries are not editable.
if to generate your rectangle the variables to be compiled are two points and a size, solidworks for the two points can insert a bond, but for the size has three possibilities:
1) take the location on the mouse click, without adding a constraint (even if displayed = other mask)

2) make it add by hand after

3) implement a form of triangulation on inputs to get a size to be sent to the bee call

you would like the 3 that has costs.
the decision is taken through the indexes I mentioned before.
if you also participate in betas, improvement requests or those stages where all users of the world draw their rankings of things to improve or add, then you may be sorry.

but stay in the position where you are and pretend that a voice, remove the work of dozens of people, maybe you have not yet understood how things turn.

 

[SolidUser]

personal opinion: I have my doubts because or are you one that in a couple of weeks you show that you have the [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] [Bleep] on what you do, or you wait for your turn, and if you have the skills, go on, you stay there... but of course it always depends on the type of work and the difficulty.

According to you, a c++ programmer or a designer who wears time?
I say that at the end of the second week they already put it under a circle.
now, whatever level.

 

[SolidUser]

with all the respect I owe to a person I don't know, I still have to preserve the frankness for which I try to distinguish myself.
Although I am a moral sw supporter and material I must say egregio soliduser that I feel too soft against sw and/or dassault. your attempt to justify a small "bug"in an explanation that could clarify the motivations but does not solve the problem, it also lays down some perplexity regarding your eventual interest.
This is my opinion, probably all wrong but such remains.
relatively then to what is behind software such as structure, organization etc.. There's something to say here, too.
when I chose sw I placed a question (to access the dimensions of a component in a practical, fast and usable way in the steps after the design) to which no one has yet been able to answer. some pious soul has broken a macro that only works in some cases, sw to create a button that does not allow to transfer the data and the undersigned realized that the solution was under the nose. in while, no technical sw wanted and/or ability to find the solution and many companies in my industry would ensure you sell the soul for this thing.
therefore the request is there but to dassault does not seem to interest.
companies are made by men and certainly also in dassault not all men do their duty diligently and/or are respectful of their customers. the customer is not just budget is something much more valuable than if badly cultivated can lead to conclusions not to read like this.
It forgives the light but I can't be different. There is fortunately the right of reply to which I am sure you will not want to give up.

geppetto, before arriving at solidworks corp. You have to move from the dealer.
already in the pre-sale phase, the seller can tell you lies to sell you a license.
once sold you are behind a technician, who is not always prepared.

to be heard by solidworks corp. There are the channels you have available every now and then:
- official forum
- surveys
- participation in betas
- requests for official and public improvement

If you do not use these channels, the official channel is that of the dealer.

then for the remains you know how it works.
I wanted to remember that I don't work for solidworks corp. but I have been a cad user for many years and besides participating where I am allowed to document.
we put the fact that we also produce software attached to mechanics, so things turn so also here from us.

Do you know when it was made official?
6 months later.
You know why they waited for a couple of reports and tests.
Do you remember the problem of the mercedes class that was overturning?
the machine was already in production and ready to be marketed.
they did after a test.

so as you see, the sw corp. adopts the same working method present in many world industrial realities.

 

[Tequila]

According to you, a c++ programmer or a designer who wears time?
I say that at the end of the second week they already put it under a circle.
now, whatever level.

Last answer about this subject, then I no longer reply because it seems to me that we are touching arguments that annoy you.timings can never be identical jobs are different, but as said dubito that they put the last one to program to the core or kernel to what you want without educating it on how it works and how the code is structured and no less how the program works. with this I do not want to say that they must follow him step by step as a child of kindergarten, but they will make him do a period of apprenticeship on what he will have to work, which then is 2 days or 2 weeks here depends on the type of work, surely to the ecological operators (no offense for this profession), will not give 2 days of learning to sweep or load the garbage, as well as to a technician will not ask after 2 days to design a company otherwise from your speech I can safely understand that even the last one out of the university in medical faculty can put on the gown and do open-hearted interventions or the brain from "first" without having experience with who has been doing these interventions for years.

hi and good continuation:smile:

ps: for the record solid edge (which uses d-cubed since it is siemens) the rectangle for 3 key points does it quietly, so it seems strange that swx is not able, same thing also the opposite, that is swx does things that if it does not make them while using the same kernels.
Hello I close here:smile:

 

[SolidUser]

Last answer about this subject, then I no longer reply because it seems to me that we are touching arguments that annoy you.timings can never be identical jobs are different, but as said dubito that they put the last one to program to the core or kernel to what you want without educating it on how it works and how the code is structured and no less how the program works. with this I do not want to say that they must follow him step by step as a child of kindergarten, but they will make him do a period of apprenticeship on what he will have to work, which then is 2 days or 2 weeks here depends on the type of work, surely to the ecological operators (no offense for this profession), will not give 2 days of learning to sweep or load the garbage, as well as to a technician will not ask after 2 days to design a company otherwise from your speech I can safely understand that even the last one out of the university in medical faculty can put on the gown and do open-hearted interventions or the brain from "first" without having experience with who has been doing these interventions for years.

hi and good continuation:smile:

ps: for the record solid edge (which uses d-cubed since it is siemens) the rectangle for 3 key points does it quietly, so it seems strange that swx is not able, same thing also the opposite, that is swx does things that if it does not make them while using the same kernels.
Hello I close here:smile:

in these two weeks we left 10 people at all levels.
people were taken from the competition and by people seeking.
after the first week of laps in the company, they started to work, taking as load as from the previous left.

I don't want you to compare me with doctors who work on people.

the topic were 'programmers' and these are considered as a normal designer, if not less, even if graduates in computer science.

 

[geppetto]

geppetto, before arriving at solidworks corp. You have to move from the dealer.
already in the pre-sale phase, the seller can tell you lies to sell you a license.
once sold you are behind a technician, who is not always prepared.

to be heard by solidworks corp. There are the channels you have available every now and then:
- official forum
- surveys
- participation in betas
- requests for official and public improvement

If you do not use these channels, the official channel is that of the dealer.

then for the remains you know how it works.
I wanted to remember that I don't work for solidworks corp. but I have been a cad user for many years and besides participating where I am allowed to document.
we put the fact that we also produce software attached to mechanics, so things turn so also here from us.

Do you know when it was made official?
6 months later.
You know why they waited for a couple of reports and tests.
Do you remember the problem of the mercedes class that was overturning?
the machine was already in production and ready to be marketed.
they did after a test.

so as you see, the sw corp. adopts the same working method present in many world industrial realities.

when they adopt then a policy aimed at the customer as well as business they can therefore prevent people like me, marcof and others from disregarding their rough superficiality.
I also wanted to remember that this forum will not be an official channel of the sw, but it represents the most important national forum dedicated to sw where opinions, considerations, praises and criticism converge. in this forum you can find experience and availability at zero cost with a level of professionalism that sw care dreams. If I were sw, I wouldn't take it so lightly. Maybe the Italian market doesn't deserve? strange because next door I see a nice banner with lots of advertising.

 

[marcof]

Maybe you don't understand something.

It seems fair. He's always the interlocutor who doesn't understand anything.

Solidworks uses parasolid as modeling kernel and d-cubed for 2d commands, 2d constraints and axieme constraints.

swx I know it from version 96, when d-cubed was still d-cubed not acquired by anyone and on their site you could see movies with examples of what their solutors of constraints did.

if to generate your rectangle the variables to fill are two points and a size

I say it's three points. non two points and one size, otherwise the third clik command would not be finished. I think you're making mirror climbing. .
in swx there are some variants of the rectangle command:
1) three of these require entry solo of three points (and no size).
2)One of these variants works perfectly (parallelogram) by capturing the snap to the remarkable points and inserting the constraints displayed in yellow before the click
3) a variant works badly (three-point rectangle) because the last point captures it but does not fix the bond
4) a variant works from disgust (retangle for center and two vertices) because on both vertices does not fix the bond.
These are facts that indicate unequivocally that it is a big kiss as godzilla! you want to write in IT to try to prove otherwise.

solidworks for the two points can insert a bond, but for the size has three possibilities:

this of the size and not of the third point is your conjecture and nothing more true? Anyway, let's move on. .

1) take the location on the mouse click, without adding a constraint (even if displayed = other mask)

this does if you draw without leaning on any geometry and if you do not take the bond displayed when you are on geometry is a kiss

2) make it add by hand after

Break! would be as if they implemented the "star" command and after selecting it in the first click appeared a popup with "now drawing a star":smile:
Come on, we're serious, please. . .

3) implement a form of triangulation on inputs to get a size to be sent to the bee call
you would like the 3 that has costs.

Strarotfl!!
I don't want anything more than what's in the toolbars of the program I bought and paid; if the sw corp enjoy doing the tricks by implementing commands that do not work what I have to do, excuse them as well?. I could at the most excuse the hak*r that has cr@**@to bad a truth found along a mule tracker, not sure 6000 euros of software paid on time as a Swiss watch along with the various subscriptions.
Incidentally, the 3 already works perfectly in the "parallelogram" variant but does not work in the other two that always use the three input points. continue to escape... you also miss that on solidedge the same command works and the solutor of the constraints is the same.

how much at the cost I thought I had already soldered, in advance besides, when I renewed the subscription the time they inserted the variants of the rectangle command for the first time (2009 ?). extra I paid again when I renewed for 2010 and the third time when I renewed for 2011. my input for placing three bank receipts worked perfectly, their rectangle for three points much less

if you also participate in betas, improvement requests or those stages where all users of the world draw their rankings of things to improve or add, then you may be sorry.

see, the problem in my opinion lies in the fact that you entered the perverse mechanism for which it is normal to produce something that does not work as promised to the customer (a button with the line command is a promise to be able to draw a line...), it is normal to ask the customer to pay after the purchase to fix problems that should not be there, and it is normal to point out that it should also participate free of betas to facilitate the development of the software that he pays.
I do not do the programmer and the cad is one of the many tools of my work. I have other much more interesting hobbies than working for free for the sw corp that then takes two or three years to solve, perhaps, the problems that are reported outside the beta programs.

a question: Have you ever purchased 6-7000 euros for a cad and paid in time 10-15000 euros in your pocket maintenances? But I think the answer is "no."

but stay in the position where you are and pretend that a voice, remove the work of dozens of people, maybe you have not yet understood how things turn.

I understand very well, trust me... I realized that making "products" built around the programming work is a ganzo craft, but you have to have some fur on the stomach to be able to inchaippettare a fee your neighbor without too many remorse of conscience. if you keep beating by putting in shape the love just then you also come to have satisfied customers to pay two, three...n times the same goods that comes after two, three, n years or never arrives.

 

[Mike1967]

I, as I'm ignorant about d-cubed (and I'm also afraid of other things...)... and... broken, at the renewal of the licenses I asked for a discount as the multibody plates do shit... So to my insignificant judgment... Let's start touching his wallet, see they'll start pulling
outside straw from cul@.... other than skills and planning (or as you write). :biggrin:

 

[Oldwarper]

I close the discussion as it is solving in a flame that no longer adds anything to what has already been discussed and well known to anyone buying software since the time of ms-dos.
you can add to all this also mobile phones, TVs, cars, clothes, shoes, etc.

The speech doesn't change.