Jack_O'neill Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 One thing I always loved about AutoCAD was how customizable it is. I think for the benefit of all of its users, it would be wise to keep the two options (Classic tool palettes & the Ribbon) open in the future. It allows people to set up the interface that works best for them. No two avid drafters have the same layout of their interface, it's one thing that makes AutoCAD more fun and productive. I am not lazy nor am I a sissy for not switching over to an interface that I know isn't as effective for me as what I already use. I rarely use the toolbars anyway. Why are there On/Off & Freeze/Unfreeze for layers? Because some people like one, some people like the other. The end product is the same. It would be wise to keep both. The only real difference in freezing a layer and turning it off is that if you use HIDE, an off layer will still hide objects, where a frozen layer will not. Why you would want to hide objects with other invisible objects escapes me. I can see no practical application for that, and to me the whole idea makes no sense. It must have to somebody or it wouldn't have been there. Same with the ribbon. Somebody at Microsoft stuck the silly thing in Office, and now everybody wants to emulate it. The Microsoft version does have one advantage in that it's easily turned on and off with CTRL+F1. When I get time, I'm going to set AutoCAD to do that as well. Then I might get round to customizing the thing to suit me. I think it would be a great place to put tools that you just gotta have, but don't use all that often. What I'd really like to see them do with it is to add the behavior of the tool palettes to it, in that it disappears when it's not needed. A small band at the top or bottom could be added so that when you pass into it, it pops open, then vanishes when you're done. The hot key thing will be a good fix for that I think. Unless you guys know how to make that happen anyway. I'd love to find out that I've just overlooked it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Guys, you're killing me here - The ribbon IS a Palette!?! [ThisIsYourBrainOnDrugsToneOfVoice] This is your Ribbon Palette "Docked", now Right Click, and select "Undock": This is your Ribbon Palette "Undocked": Right Click the Ribbon Palette's title bar (or select the options button), and select Anchor [Left/Right]: This is your Ribbon Palette Anchored Left: This is your Ribbon Palette Anchored Left, Expanded: Edit: Forgot to mention, your tabs are the icons running along the top of the Ribbon Palette. ... Any questions? [/ThisIsYourBrainOnDrugsToneOfVoice] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkent Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Yes, I do believe it's a fair comparison. If you look at my screencap, that Ribbon contains far more tools than the OOTB Ribbon. Layers and Properties are not controls I'm willing to give up, so 70 to 80 "other" tools is about the most that can be available/visible at any one time without making the Ribbon even bigger (taller). If you can get more than that on the Ribbon, I'd certainly be interested in seeing how you have yours arranged. I would agree with your comments about the Contextual features of the Ribbon, but the gains realized in Contexual Ribbon tabs is not greater than my preference for having the tools I used most available with a single mouse click. I am still in the process of trimming the fat from the OOTB ribbon so I am not at a point where I can post anything compelling as yet. As I said, I keep the layers toolbar up, and the properties also, along with the Ribbon, shrunk to its smallest size. I am still trying the Ribbon out and keeping an open mind. I don't think anyone "knows" it doesn't work for them until they have given it more than a cursory look, not saying that is your case. Sorry but the arguments I am hearing against the Ribbon sound a lot like the protests when cad was new and people swore they could draw on the board faster than they could with "that thing", I know because I was one of them (circa 1989). Truth be told, a lot of things could be drawn on the board faster, but then when it came time to manipulate/edit that drawing the efficiency of cad was much better than the board. I think the same thing may be true for the Ribbon, yes it takes a few nano-seconds longer to click twice, but maybe, just maybe, the nano-second that takes will pale to the efficiency found once there. I am not here to sell the Ribbon, I don't care who does or doesn't use it. I am just saying that until I have given it a real test I won't know for myself if it is better. An extra mouse click doesn't matter to me if that extra click gets me to an area of tools that then make things much quicker and easier, and for me that is what the Ribbon is all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkent Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Why are there On/Off & Freeze/Unfreeze for layers? Because some people like one, some people like the other. The end product is the same. It would be wise to keep both. Actually those choices are there because in the 1980's computers were very slow. If you turned layers off then autocad would work at the same speed, but turning the layers back on would cause no slow down because they were already being "seen" by the program If you froze layers then autocad would work faster because those vector calculations didn't have to be performed. But when you thawed there was a pause while the calcs were done on the objects now needed updated by the program. So depending on your needs there was a definite advantage to using one over the other. With today's computers there is essentially no difference as far as the time needed to regen after a thaw, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNK Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Actually those choices are there because in the 1980's computers were very slow. If you turned layers off then autocad would work at the same speed, but turning the layers back on would cause no slow down because they were already being "seen" by the program If you froze layers then autocad would work faster because those vector calculations didn't have to be performed. But when you thawed there was a pause while the calcs were done on the objects now needed updated by the program. So depending on your needs there was a definite advantage to using one over the other. With today's computers there is essentially no difference as far as the time needed to regen after a thaw, etc. Thank you for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_O'neill Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 He he...I did not realize it was a palette. Everybody talks about palettes and the ribbon separately, and I had not investigated far enough. Thanks Renderman...I'll dig deeper. I simply have not taken time to explore this tool fully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen1980 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I tried the ribbon when I first got 2009 thinking I had better evaluate the ribbon along with the programme for my department. To start with I found it OK but slow and I preferred my customized right click menus, then I got 2010 and found that the contextual ribbons slowed my machine down too much (I have a computer with valves and spinning tapes ) so I had to get rid. I now have got started playing with alias's and tool palettes so I mainly key command with a few buttons on my QAT (like that) and for the esoteric commands I can't remember I use that start button thingy (I like.) I have one line of drop down toolbars i.e. properties and my tool pallet docked to the right hand side of the screen. I hide my menus and commandline if I need more screen space. Who knows if the rumours about new computers and bigger screens are true I may have a play with the latest ribbons but I generally don't like icons now especially since I went to a trackball due to worn out wrists (no jokes!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nestly Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 @ Nestly - Have you tried undocking the ribbon, and anchoring it (left, or right)? I know many users that do this, similar to the traditional SSM placement here (also anchored). Just a thought. I did try that very briefly, and I didn't find that appealing ether. First of all, horizontal text and vertical panels is even less space efficient than the regular ribbon. (ie combo boxes and dropdowns mean a vertical ribbon will necessarily be wider than a horizontal ribbon is tall.) Secondly, it's much harder to find a specific button when it's in a big cluster of other buttons. With toolbars, I have no buttons completely surrounded by other button, and the position/order of those buttons never change relative to my workspace/environment. I'm not knocking those who like the Ribbon, but I really think I've given the Ribbon a fair chance, and I've come to the conclusion that simply does not suite the needs and preferences of all users. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 He he...I did not realize it was a palette. Everybody talks about palettes and the ribbon separately' date=' and I had not investigated far enough. Thanks Renderman...I'll dig deeper. I simply have not taken time to explore this tool fully.[/quote'] Always happy to help, Jack. Remember, the Ribbon (Palette) is nothing 'new' and has been around for years. I've been using The Ribbon (Palette), admittedly only intermittently, since 2009. However, the Ribbon (Palette) *may* have been introduced in the 2007, or 2008 version... not really sure as I jumped from 2006-->2009 (as shown in the pics above). Again, I'm not here to sell the Ribbon (Palette) to anyone... I could not care less how anyone else works; that's your business. It's my personal opinion, however, that in order for someone to genuinely evaluate something, you'd have to know/explore the facts (limitations, benefits, etc.), then form your own opinion. Failing to do so just makes one sounds like they stepped right out of a Ren & Stimpy episode: ^^ My $0.02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNK Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I did try that very briefly, and I didn't find that appealing ether. First of all, horizontal text and vertical panels is even less space efficient than the regular ribbon. (ie combo boxes and dropdowns mean a vertical ribbon will necessarily be wider than a horizontal ribbon is tall.) Secondly, it's much harder to find a specific button when it's in a big cluster of other buttons. With toolbars, I have no buttons completely surrounded by other button, and the position/order of those buttons never change relative to my workspace/environment. I'm not knocking those who like the Ribbon, but I really think I've given the Ribbon a fair chance, and I've come to the conclusion that simply does not suite the needs and preferences of all users. What ever does? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I did try that very briefly, and I didn't find that appealing ether. First of all, horizontal text and vertical panels is even less space efficient than the regular ribbon. (ie combo boxes and dropdowns mean a vertical ribbon will necessarily be wider than a horizontal ribbon is tall.) Secondly, it's much harder to find a specific button when it's in a big cluster of other buttons. With toolbars, I have no buttons completely surrounded by other button, and the position/order of those buttons never change relative to my workspace/environment. I'm not knocking those who like the Ribbon, but I really think I've given the Ribbon a fair chance, and I've come to the conclusion that simply does not suite the needs and preferences of all users. Fair enough, Nestly - I'm certainly not here to convince you what's best for you, my friend. You are fortunate enough to work with vanilla AutoCAD (according to your profile), whereas I work with both Land Desktop and Civil 3D. Any vertical product is without the typical tool bar equivillent for the ribbon components (i.e., Alignments, Profiles, etc.)... that is without customization, of course. This was one of my primary complaints in the original thread I linked on the first page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Oh, I also forgot to mention that the Ribbon (Palette) can also be Docked at the bottom... just like the Default location for the Command Line. With the Ribbon (Palette) Undocked, and Unanchored, drag the Ribbon (Palette) to the bottom, until you see it "Dock". Screeny: The ridiculous configuration shown above is for demonstration purposes only... I cannot imagine anyone actually using this configuration for production. LoL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I did try that very briefly, and I didn't find that appealing ether. First of all, horizontal text and vertical panels is even less space efficient than the regular ribbon. (ie combo boxes and dropdowns mean a vertical ribbon will necessarily be wider than a horizontal ribbon is tall.) Secondly, it's much harder to find a specific button when it's in a big cluster of other buttons. With toolbars, I have no buttons completely surrounded by other button, and the position/order of those buttons never change relative to my workspace/environment. I'm not knocking those who like the Ribbon, but I really think I've given the Ribbon a fair chance, and I've come to the conclusion that simply does not suite the needs and preferences of all users. Well, when the default interfaces are insufficient, there's only one thing to do... make your own. Creating a Docking Palette for AutoCAD with VB.NET I say it again... Adapt, Improvise, and Overcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_O'neill Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Always happy to help, Jack. Remember, the Ribbon (Palette) is nothing 'new' and has been around for years. I've been using The Ribbon (Palette), admittedly only intermittently, since 2009. However, the Ribbon (Palette) *may* have been introduced in the 2007, or 2008 version... not really sure as I jumped from 2006-->2009 (as shown in the pics above). Again, I'm not here to sell the Ribbon (Palette) to anyone... I could not care less how anyone else works; that's your business. It's my personal opinion, however, that in order for someone to genuinely evaluate something, you'd have to know/explore the facts (limitations, benefits, etc.), then form your own opinion. Failing to do so just makes one sounds like they stepped right out of a Ren & Stimpy episode: ^^ My $0.02 I jumped from 2007 ADT to 2010 vanilla. 07 had the "dashboard" which I'm guessing was the predecessor to the ribbon. I found it clunky and awkward most of the time, and viewed it as a regrouping of the the tool bars that I very seldom used anyway. My drawing style is made up of keyboard shortcuts, vba and lisp routines. I keep the layers tool bar open and occasionally i'll use something from a pull down menu. I have a Belkin N52te on one side of the keyboard, a 5 button trackball on the other side. The keyboard itself is a Saitek cyborg, which has a dozen programmable keys (6 on each side). Back in the old DOS days, we had a batch program that would run just before autocad would load that would allow us to use a variety of keyboard shortcuts or quick keys as we called them. I learned to work that way, and have never cared for the "cartoons" as I call them. Palettes presented a way to insert standard details, surrounds, hatches that were already scaled properly and all that sort of stuff so I jumped on that. Love the way that works. The ribbon was another regrouping of toolbars, and I don't like toolbars so I didn't dig into it very deep. I can see where if you have a regular mouse in one hand and a Spaceball in the other, ribbons and toolbars might be the way to go. But for the way I draw (and speaking just for me), it just gets in the way most of the time. Someone else wants to use it, that's great. Just don't take functionality away and force people to move on because it "looks cool". There are lots and lots of users out there just like me who will not upgrade if you do. The only thing that has kept AutoCAD on top aside from the fact that until recently it really had no competitors was it's flexibility in customization. Force users into a cookie cutter package and you'll drive customers away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 don't take functionality away and force people to move on because it "looks cool". There are lots and lots of users out there just like me who will not upgrade if you do. The only thing that has kept AutoCAD on top aside from the fact that until recently it really had no competitors was it's flexibility in customization. Force users into a cookie cutter package and you'll drive customers away. This is where I am, as far as opinion goes, as well. From my standpoint, Autodesk is 'taking functionality away' by simply not creating the potentially wanted toolbars for all of the new Aec* functionality that is built into vertical packages (i.e., Civil 3D). They're (I feel) 'forcing' the ribbon on us instead of providing us an alternative to the 'classic' way of doing things, and winning users over by demonstrating the benefits. Give us the tools we need, and let us decide HOW to work - Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 Actually those choices are there because in the 1980's computers were very slow. If you turned layers off then autocad would work at the same speed, but turning the layers back on would cause no slow down because they were already being "seen" by the program If you froze layers then autocad would work faster because those vector calculations didn't have to be performed. But when you thawed there was a pause while the calcs were done on the objects now needed updated by the program. So depending on your needs there was a definite advantage to using one over the other. With today's computers there is essentially no difference as far as the time needed to regen after a thaw, etc. Thanks for this info!! I had teachers and a few books I've read that didn't know why there were both options. Obviously they didn't know their CAD history like you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 Give us the tools we need, and let us decide HOW to work - Period. This is why both options should be available in the future. Thanks for the input everybody! This surely has become a hot topic today! It was fun hearing what people had to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNK Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 This is where I am, as far as opinion goes, as well. From my standpoint, Autodesk is 'taking functionality away' by simply not creating the potentially wanted toolbars for all of the new Aec* functionality that is built into vertical packages (i.e., Civil 3D). They're (I feel) 'forcing' the ribbon on us instead of providing us an alternative to the 'classic' way of doing things, and winning users over by demonstrating the benefits. Give us the tools we need, and let us decide HOW to work - Period. That's how I feel about the use of Enterprise .cui. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkent Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 ..Obviously they didn't know their CAD history like you do. Yeah, feeling older every day too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBox Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 This is why both options should be available in the future. Indeed. That's how I feel about the use of Enterprise .cui. There's a difference between CAD Standards and Enterprise CUI/CUIx. I implement an Enterprise CUI/CUIx and none of my users are unable to customize... what specifically do you have an issue with? Perhaps I can help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.