See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

View Poll Results: Give Autodesk's CUI implementation a rating 1 to 10

Voters
179. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1 - Worst ever new feature implementation

    34 18.99%
  • 2 - Disastrous

    27 15.08%
  • 3 - Really bad

    31 17.32%
  • 4 - Poor

    28 15.64%
  • 5 - Mediocre

    26 14.53%
  • 6 - Fair

    10 5.59%
  • 7 - Good

    11 6.15%
  • 8 - Very good

    8 4.47%
  • 9 - Excellent

    3 1.68%
  • 10 - Best ever new feature implementation

    1 0.56%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    I could stop if I wanted to Steve Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    2004-11
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    294
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    How well do you think Autodesk has implemented the new CUI menus, including the workspace feature? Are you happy with the system design, the user interface, the API, the user documentation, the developer documentation, the file format documentation, the samples and guidance from Autodesk about how to use it, the stability, the lack of bugs, the performance, etc. Rate it according to what's important to you.
    Last edited by Steve Johnson; 2005-06-20 at 07:03 AM.

  2. #2
    Time Lord Steve_Bennett's Avatar
    Join Date
    2015-12
    Location
    far, far, far away...
    Posts
    4,730
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    Well, for their first attempt at making something such as programing menus & such a graphical interface, I think it's a great step in the right direction. I'm not saying it's perfect or that it's horrible. To go from editing menus in a text document to using an interface is great.

    To provide a minuscule amount of info about this was a very, very bad idea. The info in the help system is useless since all it does is tell you what the stuff is, not how to implement it, how to utilize it properly, or any other critical aspect of that feature of the software. It would have been nice to have a step by step process for modifying the interface of AutoCAD & what different parts of the interface you would be required to utilize.

    Hopefully, Autodesk won't receive scathing feedback about the CUI simply because people don't know how to customize it in the proper manner. At first, I was rather upset with this new feature, but that was due to my lack of knowledge & understanding of it. Now that I have a better grasp of it's intricacies, I'm realize why I was not happy with it. Now I'm more disappointed with the lack of documentum since the average user has no idea where to begin & can screw things up in a hurry. From a CAD Management standpoint this is a good & bad thing. Good since the new interface allows you to lock down the workspace & keep those unwitting souls from messing up AutoCAD. It's bad if you have a group of people used to customizing their workspace & want to leave it unlocked. I suppose I could go on, but then I digress.
    Steve Bennett |BIM Manager
    Taylor Design | Adventures in BIM

  3. #3
    I could stop if I wanted to Steve Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    2004-11
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    294
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    I should point out that I'm not asking people to rate the idea of combining customisation into a single graphical interface. Personally, I think it's a great idea. I'm asking people to rate the implementation. Given that this idea was going to be incorporated into AutoCAD, how well has Autodesk actually done so?

  4. #4
    Certified AUGI Addict jaberwok's Avatar
    Join Date
    2000-12
    Location
    0,0,0 The Origin
    Posts
    8,570
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    For long-term acad users the new interface is far from intuitive. Therefor more/better documentation would have been a great help.
    This may be one of those cases where a new user, coming to it with no preconceived ideas, may be in a better position.

  5. #5
    I could stop if I wanted to
    Join Date
    2005-02
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    278
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnbogie
    For long-term acad users the new interface is far from intuitive. Therefor more/better documentation would have been a great help.
    More? How about "Some"?

    Personally I think that the concept is brilliant. It offers an amazing degree of control to the CAD manager whilst still safely allowing freedom for the users. I also think that it has some huge potential once people learn how to use it.

    Its downfall, however, is that currently very few people know how to use it!

    It is not customisable out of the box, as you have to re-arrange the cui files before you get anything like predictable results. (Or at least that was my experience)

    It has major issues with consistency, too. I have made many customisations repeatedly because they work for a while and then simply disappear and I don't know the new interface well enough to be able to find them. Or worse still they do what the current batch has done - show up in the CUI looking completely normal but refuse to display in the actual ACAD interface. Literally a case of working one minute - not working the next. VERY frustrating.

    I imagine there are plenty of people about who are like me too, who have been dumped into the role of 'CAD Manager' (without getting the title) simply because nobody else in the company has both the skills and the flexibility of time to be able to do the job. I am by no means a CAD Guru, so I rely on forums such as this and my other contacts in the industry when I hit a wall - and CUI is by far the highest wall I have encountered yet!

    A much smarter approach may have been to either implement the changes gradually over successive releases, or better still provide some useful documentation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve_Bennet
    When was the last time I got a manual with some software I got? I think it was with a game I bought. That had a manual.
    It's a sad truth, but this trend of not supplying documentation has been gaining momentum for quite some time.

    Do you have a manual for what is without a doubt the most complex and powerful piece of software that is on your computer? i.e. Your Operating System

  6. #6
    100 Club lance.81922's Avatar
    Join Date
    2005-01
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Posts
    176
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    I'm convinced that documentation has gone the way of the dodo for the simple reason that corporate management no longer sees it as a justifiable expense. The logic may run as follows -- "They're long term users, so why spend money on books when they will upgrade without it?", or "How many copies of the software are sold by the manual?" The reason that I find this trend so vexing is that Autodesk used to be perhaps the very best at documenting their stuff. With a complex new feature like CUI, I think this lack of comprehensive documentation is a major failing.

  7. #7
    I could stop if I wanted to
    Join Date
    2005-02
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    278
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    Can I please change my vote?

    I'd like to change it to a MINUS FIVE - that being "The worst implementation of any change to any piece of software that I have ever worked with throughout my entire career!!"

    Earlier on I could see the potential benefits of the CUI, but I think I've now decided that they don't add up to the frustrations that are the cost.

    I've been happily using the CUI now for a while, and after reading a number of discussions here on AUGI and elsewhere I thought I had it to a point where I was happy with it.

    Then today I go to add some items to my pull down menus and everything looks perfect within the CUI, I click OK and it does its little rebuild of the menus etc. and I go to my pull down and nothing has changed.

    "Oh, darn, I must have hit 'Cancel' instead of 'OK', that was silly - now I'll have to do it again."

    So I goes and does it all over again, being very careful to first select 'Apply' (to see if any errors come up - not that I've ever seen any feedbak from the CUI as yet) and then 'OK' and then I go and check my pull down - NOTHING!!

    Now I KNOW that I have not changed anything that should have any effect on this since performing EXACTLY the same task yesterday with no problems whatsoever. I find it completely astounding that a product with a pricetag as high as this can be shipped in what essentially amounts to a non-functional state. If it can't provide predictable results then it may as well not work at all!

    OK,.....I've had my rant now,....I'm calm,.....I'm calm.........Aah! NOW I'm calm.

  8. #8
    Retired Forum Staff Rico's Avatar
    Join Date
    2005-06
    Location
    In the hospital cuz of my fever for more cowbell
    Posts
    1,828
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Post Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    Quote Originally Posted by steve.johnson
    I should point out that I'm not asking people to rate the idea of combining customisation into a single graphical interface. Personally, I think it's a great idea. I'm asking people to rate the implementation. Given that this idea was going to be incorporated into AutoCAD, how well has Autodesk actually done so?
    I think that the IDEA was good. The way they went about it was bad though. I think that there a lot of people out there who get used to drafting one way (draftspeople are creatures of habit) and when something new is introduced without some sort of gradual integration it just causes havoc. Personally, I like the power behind the CUI, but I know a lot of my co-workers are grumbling about it. "Why did they change what worked before?" "It's all a cash grab" are just a few of the things I hear often when talking about the new CUI. I think if something like a drag and drop a la previous versions of AutoCAD was kept, more people would be happier. It's just so hard to find the time and resources to go for training on CUI. I think next time a new feature like this is going to be implemented there should be some training videos or something like that available directly from autodesk as opposed to having to hunt the training videos down on the web. I think that might go a fair way to easing people's gruntings. Make the info easier to find.

    But that's just my humble opinion, anyway.

  9. #9
    I could stop if I wanted to Steve Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    2004-11
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    294
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Default Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    Please note that I have done a similar poll for dynamic blocks. I think it will make an interesting comparison.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    2005-06
    Posts
    3
    Login to Give a bone
    0

    Cool Re: CUI Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.

    The idea of making a GUI for menus was good. The idea of making users make commands that get assigned to toolbar buttons, pulldowns, shortcuts...whatever, was actually really good. Even helping users migrate was a good idea.

    But it all fell apart as the people designing the CUI did not seem to stop and make a list of activities users normally do, and how to make those things easy.

    Instead they did the most classic nerd design I have ever seen - and I thought some of my programs were bad (some are for sure).

    What autodesk should have done is ask "how can we improve the interface experience?", not "how can we compress everything into one dialog box?".

    The whole thing would not be so bad except they made the mistake of CONNECTING menus where the main menu loads others. They did not consider that connecting things removes freedom, just when we need it most. The fact that mouse buttons only work right if in the main menu and that you can only make workspaces in the main menu is a sign that the authors did not comprehend the first law of customization - keep the acad default separate from the custom items.

    What in the world happened? So what we need now is lots of fixes, documentation on intended setup, a complete API, and a redesigned dialog. In, other words, a complete rewrite of the interface. But the ideas are not bad.

    So if the ideas are good and the interface bad, yes, the implementation is horrible and is causing headache to my users. Its all fixable though, I sure hope Adesk revamps this effort.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Dynamic Block Implementation: Good Or Bad? The Poll.
    By Steve Johnson in forum Dynamic Blocks - Technical
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 2005-11-03, 07:30 PM
  2. ADT implementation?
    By bbacker in forum ACA General
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2005-02-04, 05:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •