Cracking The 2010 UI - Go back to classic

[Phil Read]

Originally Posted by luigi

FYI - Official Autodesk page on Classic UI was modified...
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/ps/dl/item?siteID=123112&id=13126336&linkID=9243099

Hades getting colder...feet...frostbite...temperature dropping...speech slurring... must...seek...warmth...n-n-neeed more clothing l-l-layers...ahh...perfect:

http://architechure.blogspot.com/200...lies-last.html

But seriously - thanks Factory. As critical as we may be – we’re very passionate customers. Key word: Customers.

[gwnelson]

I love them. Send (5).

Carl Bass

[troberts]

Has anyone tried clicking on the link in the AutoDesk Page?

http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/debug.ini

It tells me that page has "moved".

[brethomp]

Originally Posted by troberts

Has anyone tried clicking on the link in the AutoDesk Page?

http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/debug.ini

It tells me that page has "moved".

The link works for me. You don't need that file anyway, the instructions to create it are posted above.

[luigi]

Phil...com'on...you had that page and shirt image waiting for Autodesk to officially notify people how to USE 2009 UI .....right?

Originally Posted by Phil Read

[/url]

Hades getting colder...feet...frostbite...temperature dropping...speech slurring... must...seek...warmth...n-n-neeed more clothing l-l-layers...ahh...perfect:

http://architechure.blogspot.com/200...lies-last.html

But seriously - thanks Factory. As critical as we may be – we’re very passionate customers. Key word: Customers.

[iankids]

Originally Posted by Phil Read

[/url]

Hades getting colder...feet...frostbite...temperature dropping...speech slurring... must...seek...warmth...n-n-neeed more clothing l-l-layers...ahh...perfect:

http://architechure.blogspot.com/200...lies-last.html

But seriously - thanks Factory. As critical as we may be – we’re very passionate customers. Key word: Customers.

Sensational!! - Just imagine a room full of architects wearing black.......ummm........ Oh well, you know what I mean - I love them - members of the society, enjoy the beer.

Ian

[bulletproofdesign]

Originally Posted by PaperStreet SoapCO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

That's a bit over the top. The point I was trying to make was that Vista is actually going to do a lot of good for us, but in the future. Now, the fact that Microsoft or whoever was putting 'Vista Ready' on inadequate machines...well, that isn't Vista's fault but the marketing scheme. If you put a MAC OS on a machine that couldn't handle it, you wouldn't blame Leopard for being a shoddy OS. I've seen a lot of people have success with Vista, even on this forum.

http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=93695

Tying this back into Revit - I'm suggesting that maybe this 2010 is laying groundwork for something we'll see more benefit from in the future. There are a lot of reasons decisions are made beyond what we can see or think we can see for ourselves. And I'd also like to remind everyone that there are actually people who like the Ribbon. They may not be the majority (or they may be, I don't know) but they are out there. I really just wish we had the opportunity to use both classic or the Ribbon. Supported and working correctly. I think that would make everyone happy.

The point I was trying to make, is that all the whinging and moaning about the UI will evole the UI heaps more than if people liked it. Hitler was a great man, charismatic and smart. If the history writers choose to demonize him, fine, they will still use the innovation that came from his methods.

There are 3 things in life:
1st breath
learning
last breath

Ribbon = big learning curve.

Imagine how scientists felt when Ernest Rutherford turned around and told them their atomic model was.... completely wrong..... Imagine the complaints and reluctance to adopt his ideas. His punishment... to be remembered for something other than the really important bits!

I agree that the old UI would be a nice option, and AD have made a fauparr not including and supporting this. Though the ribbon may be here to stay.

I don't mind if it stays, as long as the serious performance issues are addressed. I very rarely look at the ribbon, shortcuts are great!

[ahauck]

Originally Posted by Andrew Dobson

Thanks Anthony.

I think that very few users doubt your sincerity, and the desire of the factory to further develop Revit.

I have a few queries/points:

(1) Why don’t Revit users get a supported Classic mode like AutoCAD? - are we less important than AutoCAD users, do we matter? - we pay more!

(2) The Ribbon interface was a mistake - even if you believe it is more efficient, it was a waste of resources in the fact that site tools etc etc would have increased users productivity much more than the ribbon. In most cases, the ribbon slows users down. The (limited) new functionality in 2010 (i.e. new modelling tools) is supported in the hacked classic interface anyway.

(3) Please fix the elements of the UI that need fixing - such as modeless dialog boxes - now finally being discussed in the "Inside the Factory" blog

(4) Please, please concentrate on developing useful productivity tools. Site Tools, text tools, more flexible drafting and detailing tools, advanced parametric modelling in families, the ability to scale families up and down, multi-processor support, PDF import/export (like AutoCAD 2010) etc etc etc. Please don’t waste the factories considerable talent on messing with the UI.

(5) Autodesk is "Committed to the new UI" which is worse than the previous one. It can be made more tollerable by:
(a) Giving persistent access to the modify tab (the previous tool bars) I suggest, top left of the ribbon, or even the QAT.
(b) Making sure the selected object modify tools (move, array copy etc) are always in the same place between tools.

It would be great if you could respond to these points.

I think that my comments reflect the view of many, many Revit users who pay Autodesk a LOT of money each year.

Hi folks.

Since Andrew had a longish numbered-list post, I thought I'd use his post as a jumping off point to answer a few questions.

0) Sorry about the broken debug.ini download on the Product Support Solution page. Support realized it wasn't working earlier today and put in a request to the webmaster to have it fixed. We're not trying to hide it, it's just a posting mistake we're working to correct.

To Andrew's points:

1) The simple answer is that given finite design, testing, and development resources, we had to make a choice to fully support development of the new UI. I'm sure we could have a discussion as to the merits of that decision, but in balancing many factors, we considered it the best choice.

Contrary to the speculation that "all" our time was spent on the UI in the 2010, I have to point out that adding the conceptual modeling infrastructure to Revit was not a trivial task, as it involved adding a fundamentally new geometry handling infrastructure that we hope to leverage in many other features of Revit in the future.

In addition, the API has again greatly advanced in Revit 2010, offering programmable interfaces for Revit Families and MEP Elements and Systems that should offer external developers many tools to extend Revit into new possibilities.

Also, a great deal of effort was put into some basic internal restructuring of Revit to help deliver more features in upcoming releases. Trade-offs are made in every release cycle, as they are in every building project, and we've all read on AUGI for the past few months many opinions as to where the Revit team should be focusing their efforts. However, I don't think anyone would argue that investing in the long-term health of a complex, popular product is bad idea. The kind of work we've been doing behind the scenes takes time to surface as new functionality, so rather than ask you to take it on faith that we've developed wisely in several areas of Revit, I'm hoping you'll see the evidence of that investment in upcoming releases.

2) While many on the AUGI forums have expressed similar opinions, we've also received a lot of positive feedback on the new UI, which has succeeded in drawing in new users of Revit who find it more accessible than the Revit 2009 UI. Recent data on other Autodesk applications having both the new and "classic" UI show about a 2 : 1 split in favor of the new UI. Contrary to the occasional assertion that the new UI has been universally rejected in all Autodesk products, we find that adoption so far is about what one might expect in offering a new interaction model. No UI is perfect, but we hope to improve Revit's interaction by listening to many of the suggestions offered by the user community.

3) We realize there's a lot of interesting and useful additions we could make to the UI, and we continue to apply resources in many areas to improve the experience.Unfortunately I can't get into specifics, due to that pesky legal regulatory environment, but there's a lot of consistent suggestions we're hoping to take action on in future releases.

4) The feedback on the subject of productivity tools coming from AUGI and elsewhere has not gone unnoticed. We can't do everything at once, but we're hoping you'll see some solid advances in upcoming releases, some of which will be based on the infrastructure changes mentioned in answer # 1.

5) Yes, we've heard these specific points expressed very clearly on AUGI and elsewhere. I make sure Product Design hears this kind of feedback as they consider how to make the UI as productive as it can be.

As always, I wish it were possible to go into more detail about what we have planned for Revit, because I think you may see some very interesting projects come to fruition in upcoming releases. We're really doing our best to try to make your experience of Revit and AEC design in general a lot better, and I hope we'll be able to demonstrate that as soon as possible.

Thanks,
Anthony

Anthony A. Hauck
BIM Design Product Line Manager

[aaronrumple]

Originally Posted by ahauck

Contrary to the speculation that "all" our time was spent on the UI in the 2010, I have to point out that adding the conceptual modeling infrastructure to Revit was not a trivial task, as it involved adding a fundamentally new geometry handling infrastructure that we hope to leverage in many other features of Revit in the future.

Of course it wasn't trivial, but it wasn't something the majority of the users needed or wanted. Sure a loft tool would have been nice, but this could have been accommodated under the old set of tools until other tools were more refined and you were ready to really wow us with the new geometry. I'm underwhelmed. It is just a bizarre way to model. Someone at adsk must know how to write a text editor? The massing tools are used maybe 2% of the time in our office (I'm being very generous here.). Text is done all day long. Not to mention trying to explain that the only way to get the symbol around the keynote number was to draw it. This misplaced focus makes adsk look dumb.

In addition, the API has again greatly advanced in Revit 2010, offering programmable interfaces for Revit Families and MEP Elements and Systems that should offer external developers many tools to extend Revit into new possibilities.

You need to get the Revit object model in order first. Not to mention work out the whole shared parameter mess that is mounting. Adding on more API at this point is just going to create a tower of babble and lead Revit down the same road as ADT. Revit doors need hardware.Windows go in by their head - not sill. Ceilings slope more than one direction. Floors slope more than one direction. DEMO'ed CEILING GRIDS SHOW AS DASHED LINES!!!!!!!!!!! We need ceiling molding, base trim and on and on. Again I had to explain today how you could use the floor slab edge for base trim, ceiling trim and chair rail - because the wall sweep tool is a pita. It makes adsk look dumb.

Also, a great deal of effort was put into some basic internal restructuring of Revit to help deliver more features in upcoming releases.....However, I don't think anyone would argue that investing in the long-term health of a complex, popular product is bad idea.

Man, I hope you've sorted out the object model. but right now Revit is a very sick puppy. We're having all sorts of issues in our office. Today I had a cute little door sitting in space all by itself. The wall was 20' away. Revit should have deleted it. No it's not a phasing/workset/design option issue. Wall here - door over there. A quick Alt>F>S>A and I get a nice scrambled display. The whole directx thing is a disaster. Drop by the office and take a look over my shoulder. It will be interesting.

Contrary to the occasional assertion that the new UI has been universally rejected in all Autodesk products, we find that adoption so far is about what one might expect in offering a new interaction model.

You'll note my other post which shows a decline of about 50% in our office's subscription because of the new ribbon being introduced to AutoCAD. Beside - what choice do we have? I'd move all our projects back to 2009 if there were backward compatability.

4) The feedback on the subject of productivity tools coming from AUGI and elsewhere has not gone unnoticed. We can't do everything at once, but we're hoping you'll see some solid advances in upcoming releases, some of which will be based on the infrastructure changes mentioned in answer # 1.

You laid the ground work for a text editor? That would be a solid.

[smcmillin]

Mr. Hauck,

I know you can't go into specifics but there are certain issues with the software that should be addressed and their is definately a lot more issues that need attention then I will list.

1. Why does the software not utilize multi-core processors? Has this already been tested with a result of no performance gain? It makes no sense.

2. I know you stated you were laying the ground work for future changes with this 2010 release but why does it seem like over the years obvious issues with the software and wish list items are ignored? Is their some suit there in a big office that just says "oh they can work around that for the next 5 years"?

I have zero programming experience, never even dabbled, but from a outside the factory view point the delay in changes seems to me that the programming required to make changes to this software must be a huge task and will probably result in the program code being completely re-written in the future for ease of providing new functionality. If the code changes, what happens to all of the custom created families many firms have invested hundreds of hours in creating. This is a big assumption but I think its valid because of the lack of new features and fixed issued stated here on Augi and other forums. To me it just seems autodesk is placing band-aids on issues and relies too much on user discovered workarounds for too many issues.

You guys at autodesk are relying too much on your brand name. This is a perfect time for another company to swoop in and steal the BIM business away from you but i'm sure Autodesk would just buy them out in that event, unless of course a company like Google threw their hat into the ring. If you think those sirens that went off at Autodesk were loud last week when the 2009 UI hack was released for 2010 just imagine what would happen if a company like Google would ever challenge you in a serios way. (not just slappin something together like Sketchup) I'm only mentioning google because of their recent FU to Microsoft. It could happen to Autodesk as well, just don't create a competing search engine and you may be able to avoid it.