Just got NX4!!!! 1

[TechnicalConsultant]

Hooray! I'm currently working on V18 and we are due to migrate next month to NX4. We have a machine running an evaluation license for NX4 and if possible i would like to ask a couple of questions.

1. I was surprised to find that by default the primitive objects icons (box,sphere,cone etc) are not activated. Is there a reason for this?

2. I want to do some testing and need to export an assembly from UG18 TCEng v.7 to my native NX4 machine. Anyone know how best to do this? I've tried going to UGManager-Export assembly but have so far had no luck

Many thanks in advance.

 

[wmalan]

When you say activated, you mean the icons are not on the desktop? No problem, the new add/remove icon tabs on the edge of each feature group are where you include them. There are also "Roles" which are basicly preset layouts for various users. You can also drag and drop any icon just about anywhere. Having missed prior NX releases your going to find lots of thing a bit different.

Don't know a thing about TCEng as I don't use it but GTAC is your friend. : )

--
Bill

 

[emissivity]

NX4 has implemented the new feature called "Roles". If you select "Last Release", the primitive objects will appear.

 

[TechnicalConsultant]

OK many thanks. Just thought it was odd that something like the primitives wasn't on by default. It got me wondering whether i was missing something like a shortcut to creating primitives or if it was trying to lead me towards the sketching route instead.

 

[ewh]

As an aside, UGS is burying commands (so that you have to hunt for them) that it wants to phase out in future releases, to get the users used to the new functionalities. One feature heading for the scap heap is INSERT PLANE, which is being replaced with datum planes.

 

[wmalan]

ewh,

"One feature heading for the scap heap is INSERT PLANE, which is being replaced with datum planes."

Really? That would really suck. I think if they polled the cam users they'd get a resounding NO for that one. I certainly wouldn't use datum plane in their place. I kinda like the little guys. Not real smart... but easy to keep track of. Great for using inplace of "temporary plane" in SeqMill.


--
Bill

 

[ewh]

Per John Baker, UGS:
As for the "Plane" object... with the last bit of work on Datum Planes in NX 4 as well as making many of the other functions that worked with the "Plane" object also now work with Datum Planes (if they didn't already), we are ready to start to "obsolete" the old "Plane" object and so we've relegated it to the "it's no longer here, but you can resurrect it" category. Note that as we go forward, we will be getting more aggressive in this effort (trust me, with NX 4 there are several other items that have been "buried" as well, just that you may not have noticed them yet, which is actually good news, if you know what I mean ;-).

 

[TechnicalConsultant]

So have the primitive objects been deliberately buried? And if so, what is meant to replace them?

 

[ewh]

As I understand it, not all buried features will be made obsolete, just that those which will be made obsolete are buried. I don't understand the reasoning for having users dig around for commonly used features, though.

 

[Xwheelguy]

noyce,

Most primitives can easily be created via a sketch on the fly, so I doubt UGS will replace them directly with something brand new or improved.

The reason being is because primitives are not parametric in the sense that you cannot position then turn around and edit that positioning. Also, if you use more than one primitive in any given model, it can cause major issues down the road when trying to relocate or move the primitive(s) in the model.

I see both sides of the fence here, both for and against primitives. Personally, I don't see why they should be removed as long as people who use them understand that UGS strongly suggests only using one primitive per model. Planes are a different story and if we can use Datum Planes in the exact same manner as Planes, then why keep Planes (at least in modeling)? I don't use CAM, so I don't know what the effects might be if Planes were removed.

Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.

http://www.enkei.com

 

[TechnicalConsultant]

Many thanks for that Tim and it certainly makes sense.

 

[fftcadsta]

We just got NX4. Why is it that "New & Improved" never means just that, new and improved? What "N&I" really means is FUBAR! At least the transition between NX3 to NX4 was made easier by the new ROLES function. A couple of clicks and you can have the same interface layout as the last release, you know, the one you're used to seeing! Of course, the addition of the ROLES function was something that could have been brought to my attention EARLIER!

Instead, I spent a day, day and a half rearranging the NX4 interface to best match the one I had in NX3! Thankfully, the people that make UG didn't pull the same stunt as the folks at AutoDesk did when they released the AutoCAD 2004 "Upgrade"!

I find AutoCAD 2004 is just plain painful to use! They changed the icons. The icons we've been used to for almost a decade have now been "cartooned," they just don't look right! Also, the decided to change the plot interface. Instead of having a two-page tabbed dialog box, now it's one and things have been moved all over the place! I still don't have the cross-hairs the "correct" way.

Change may be good, but not when it's this drastic! If things are going to change THIS much, maybe they should call it something else! (Sorry for the rant. I had to get this all of my chest somewhere!)

((What are the three most heard words after a software "upgrade"? WTF! ))

 

[ewh]

Give it some time. I really didn't like the changes when I first had to use NX4. Now, after having to use it for a couple of months I am becomming more accustomed to it, and have found only a few things that I feel they missed the boat on.
My best advice would be, when you run into frustrating changes, approach it as learning a different system. After a while, it will become as familiar (warts and all) as what you are now used to.

 

[fftcadsta]

I take back the thing about AutoCAD 2004 plot interface. It's been a while since I've used it and it IS a two-page like the 2002. My bad! Although, I think things have still been moved around a little on it so it's still wierd to use.

 

[Vikingbro]

fftcadsta,

I'm sorry, but what else do you want UGS to do? Call you personally and tell you things have changed?

Look, default appearance out-of-the-box is different!! The backgraound of the Gateway is changed and it is right here - THE FIRST SCREEN YOU SEE - that they tell you that here are the changes that were made! It is somehow UGS' fault of you didn't read about the changes?

Also, EVERY new release has a "What's New" guide. You might want to look into that.


Chris Cooper
Senior CAD Specialist
Cleveland Golf / Never Compromise

http://www.clevelandgolf.com

http://www.nevercompromise.com

 

[Xwheelguy]

fftcadsta,

I agree with Eric and Chris. Ever since UGS decided to offer up a Windows platform, they've pretty much been tinkering with the interface with each release or at the most every other release. I found that about the only way to keep up with the vast number of changes was to log into the GTAC support site and look for new What's New guides that are posted there from Beta until final release.

Since I've been using UG, the interface has completely changed 3 times, the icons 3 times and I've lost count at how many different ways we've been able to select objects.

Sure, it's a REAL pain in the rear to have to re-train or re-learn techniques or steps that you've already become accustomed to, but if it weren't for changes, we'd probably still be sitting here running NX with joysticks, input tablets and/or PFKs.

Also, I feel it's important to remember that UGS is not only making changes for our benefit, but also to make the transition from I-deas to NX a smoother one for the I-deas users. UGS is borrowing quite a bit of technology or methods from I-deas. Some are almost unnoticeable, but they are there.

Be patient...the changes aren't going to end once I-deas is finally merged into NX.

Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.

http://www.enkei.com

 

[ewh]

In the CAD industry, change is a given. Had UG stayed with the tablets PFKs (I still miss those) and dumb solids, it would probably be a fringe program, if it still existed at all. The only thing of value they would be left with is the parasolid kernal.
In the competitive market that we see today, you have to have something to make you stand out and increase your user base. That is what UGS is doing. Sure, it can make life hard for legacy users, but the alternative would be to switch CAD packages every time one advances ahead of the others, or be left behing with archaic technology. I'd rather stay with what I know and am most productive with while supplementing my skills as the changes come.
As Tim posted, the changes aren't going to end, so it would be better to be patient and adapt as they come. Besides, it helps keep our minds limber coping with the changes.

 

[larrycoyle]

I've been thinking this "problem" since it was first mentioned above. You talk about being burried and I guess the reason I did not see that nor pay much attention to how the system installed is because I have a bad habit of doing one thing.

The very first thing I do when I install any new software is go to the menu option of "Customize Menu". Then I just click on all of the boxes of things I think are either new or I might like to try again. Of course you have to have a license for whatever you check but you can still check the box and do like i do... Find out later (and cuss myself) that you don't have a license.

As for changes from one version to the other. You have to look at all of the things UGS and other software companies have to do/change from one version to the next. They don't always get it right and some are better than others. Still I like to use it a little before I pass judgement.

A qustion for those of you who do not like what they changed... Do you ever submit the survey they send out every year asking you to weigh each of the major changes they are considering? If not, why do you complain?

Larry

Larry Coyle
Cylinder Head Engineering, LLC

http://www.cylinderheadengineering.com

 

[ewh]

Unfortunately, it isn't always the major changes that cause headaches, but the little ones. Those you don't usually find out about until you discover them yourself, then you have to retrain yourself to effectively use those changes.

 

[Xwheelguy]

Yeah, my biggest gripe is the way rectangluar details are defined now. I absolutely HATE the current method of making them from the center out....that should be for arcs and circles ONLY. Now I'm having to redefine all of my rectangular boundaries every time because of the method being less accurate and my lack of precision mouse clicking. With the old method, I could use the cross hairs to gage the area that would be enclosed, now I have nothing to use as a gage since it begins in the center.

I'm getting ticked just typing this, so I'll stop now before I get my soapbox out.

Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.

http://www.enkei.com