Google is Listening!
-
@jclements said:
At LadyBugz (Carolyn):
Why are postings tagged as inappropriate and the author not informed of why and by whom?Does anyone have the capability of tagging a posting as inappropriate?
Postings here at SCF or at Google's pages?
-
Everybody is right. But that was not my point. I think, that Google IS developing more and more tools(what also can be done by plugins....?!) for their Google Earth project and put them in SU.
I think Ruby IS a great option to make a good piece of software better, and I'm glad we have that option. But what I wanted to say is that I'm missing just ESSENTIAL modeling tools, that can also be integrated in the existing tools(for instance; selecting a line an use PushPull on it..). And, off course (to Marian), I know that you can model anything with Sketchup...but there are tools that can do it a LOT faster. I think Google must come up with different versions, that's all. I LOVE plugins!!! But the core of the concept must be good to...especially when you market your software on architectural academies.... -
@unknownuser said:
[edit] @diego
And do that to everything then we'll have a thousand tools to navigate
no. More tools not.
I just meant the possibility of integrating more functions to the same tool. pushpull to be more complete.
I think skechup not have to add more tools only support to developers and improve the current core.
but, the tools rotate, scale, follow me, move, pushpull and offset. have to be more complete. may be the video options or other.
sketchup all functions must be improved. but not add new tools -
It'd be neat for Instance if say joint push pull could be available via plugin but it ties itself in some way to push/pull.
ie- if I choose to add jpp to my system, I could assign a modifier key to regular push pull in order to activate it. Or maybe a flyout toolbar that If I click and hold push/pull, my other options pop out but the UI in general remains clean unless I decide to clutter it up with options I choose.If someone makes a selection tool ruby, it could attach itself to select etc.
-
Right Diego, I was talking about what you are. Not making new tools per se but adding new functions to the existing ones. You're still going to have to activate the new features in some form or another be it a toolbar, menus, modifier keys etc. However it would be done, there is going to be a whole lot more to navigate. It's going to be a mess.
I would like exactly one of the functions you mentioned to be in SU. Some might want more, some even less.Point being, I would like to customize to suit my needs. That's why the plugin system works so well (or, could work so well)
I mean, I have a few ideas that would help me work faster but I don't expect them to be in core sketchup. You probably wouldn't like my ideas so why should they be cluttering up your screen?
-
Jeff, I really like your idea of pluging (like JPP) tying into native SU tools. I just recently made the switch from Firefox to Chrome and I wish that SU would take a lot of lessons from Chrome. The extensions (plugins) are really well integrated, cleanly fit into the UI, and are extremely easy to install. Firefox was getting a bit clunky in the UI with various plugins added and had to restart everytime you added a new one. I don't mean to make this a browser discussion of course, but I just mean to point out another product made by Google which has gotten right a lot of what people are asking for.
Another idea along the same vein, which I got from Chrome as well, would be a built in Sync function which would Sync between multiple computers using your Google login. It could sync shortcut keys, preferences, plugins, default template, materials, etc.
-Brodie
-
@jclements said:
At LadyBugz (Carolyn):
Why are postings tagged as inappropriate and the author not informed of why and by whom?
Does anyone have the capability of tagging a posting as inappropriate?Hi John,
Looking into this for you– folks are a bit slow getting back from the holiday weekend this morning. I think your posts were marked as 'inappropriate' because they included multiple ideas in a single post. You should post again, but please only one idea per post.
john
. -
If google is listening, then let’s talk to google !
I think that everyone (mostly) around here, will be agree to say that what makes the attractive force of SketchUp was Innovation, and that concept left the program sometimes ago, sadly.
What I mean is that there are many way to make things in the same time more rich, while keeping them simple.
Actually, when someone says on the forum “we should add this function”, I'm really sad to see that there is always someone to respond “no, no, keep sketchup simple”... that classical answer clearly shows that there’s no innovative research in term of interface going on.For example, let’s continue to talk about the “push pull” tool, the emblematic one.
At first, it was only made to extrude simple faces, and that was a genius approach. But as usage evolves, people are facing new situations, and have, in that case, to push pull far more than just a face : a complex surface, a series of non attached faces, a line, and so on. So, Ruby developers have create tools, separately, that respond efficiently to each problematic.To me, Ruby tools like that should only be necessary as a kind of transition element, before an upgrade that resolve the problem they were pointing (and I say that with great great respect to all the Ruby developers... their work would be more interesting if they didn’t have to fight everytime with originally unsolved problems).
So, in the case of the “push pull”, in 2010 it should be a kind of multipurpose and intelligent tool, that is able to extrude about everything, regarding to the context. It will greatly help new user, by assisting their hand efficiently, and it will boost the productivity of pro user by reducing the amount of operation necessary to make one simple action.
It's really strange to see that no one is ever mentioning the fact that the base of SketchUp could evolve...SketchUp way of handling situation is not some kind of sacred text. The original set of tool was good when it was released, many years ago, but it have to evolve. Creating new function does not mean adding modified old tools to the program, but rethinking the way the original funtion was working....and that should be the job of the developers (no offense...).
I don't like to talk about others software, but programs like Inventor Fusion or spaceclaim, try to find new approach, by making the program more clever, in order to make things more simple, while still really powerful.I’m aware that research and development are an expensive process, that’s why I agree on a previous post, that call for a bigger gap between pro and free version (sorry...).
So, thank you Google for you’re attention ( it sounds so cool to say that...), and please, give to sketchup the means to be the application it could (and should) be !
-
I think you might be missing me when I say keep it simple.
In actuality, what I'm suggesting is probably a lot more complex than adding a bunch of new tools
I'm talking more along the lines of making sketchup a platform instead of a bloated app. I mean, aren't there already enough bloated apps out there for you to choose from?
I interpret a lot of these feature request along the lines of 'i want sketchup to do what xxxxx.app does. I'm comfortable using sketchup and don't want to learn a new app that can already do what I'm looking for. "
Like you want sketchup to grow with you while ignoring the very things that attracted you to it in the first place.
-
@ Wip....I've nothing more to say.....
-
Some general observations with regards to this thread:
1- I believe that the initiation of "Google SketchUp Questions and Ideas" is acknowledgement by Boulder (not meaning Google at large) that they'd like a better means of gaging what users want and how to accommodate a "sustainable" product and adhere to financial "well-being". It is not the loudest voice heard but usually the sum of all voices that is heard. "Google SketchUp Quesions and Ideas" may be the hearing-aid they are looking for. I am not fond of its format, but will give it a try.
2- The fact that they opened up Ruby programming should have been the handwriting on the wall ... they want to keep the tools and interface philosophy close to their legacy look as possible, afterall that is part of what appealed to people to begin with. As some of us may remember, FollowMe was around for a while before it became a formal tool ... you just had to know where to access it. But it took a while to release it. Ruby has allowed a more informal way for other talented people to provide the "Pro" users with better tools without depending upon version releases or priorities beyond their control. That said, I really, really hope that Boulder will invest more heavily in supporting the Ruby programmers in whatever way possible, including Layout **{**ie., more hooks into the core program, direct access to the software engineers, a QA review by Boulder of scripts (if the author so desires) so the scripts could a receive "official certification", etc. }.
3- It seems that as a program matures, that criticism of it rises at a increasing rate. I have participated in various forums and beta tested a couple of 2D apps for periods of 3 or 4 years each and it is ALWAYS the same. I attribute a large part of this is due a program's basic flexibility and appeal to a large number of people with diverse needs. As the user-base develops their own workflows, so does their dependency and passion. It is the Catch-22 of good software. When product managers and their staff listen and engage their user-base, the better the program becomes as it matures. It is my perception that for the last year or so Boulder has been more engaging.
4- I do agree that having better built-in animation capabilities and camera tools are just as important as the geometry contained in the model. A design will be better understood when viewed by the client, audience, or when viewed "unsupervised" via the SU-viewer.
Regards, John
-
Just one more thing before I get back to work.
Taking the path of 'add all this stuff for ME' doesn't seem too productive and/or likely. Put yourself in the developers shoes and try to understand their vision. Personally, I would love to bloat the he'll out of sketchup as long as it was tailored to my personal needs. If i try consider everybody, which I think google does (ranging from beginners to advanced modelers) then, while I may understand some of the demands of the expert users- in all likelihood I'm not going to cater to them when they are such a small part of the user base. That balance is important to understand when making demands and I personally feel it's better to discuss ideas that include all users. Sketchup is going to remain simple wether you like it or not but it'd would be nice if the individual user could complicate it to their liking.
(sorry about the choppy typing etc. I'm on a phone)
-
Just attended the 3d basecamp in Boulder...one of the requests for both sketchup 7 and 8 was the ability to Poche. I have 2 work around methods. I have posted a tutorial on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfGwVwkR7yE
Thanks
Bob -
Jeff, are you afraid to criticize Google or something? Well sorry, But Google HAS TO listen to ALL users and do have to make decisions in which way the software has to develop. That's all. But let it develop! There are modeling tools that everyone can use...in every field....like for instance a more clever push-pull tool...
Where is Ladybugz?
ps; don't misunderstand me...I want to have a tattoo of the Sketchup-logo on my forehead...I love it...but it seams that they have lost something...
-
Not afraid to criticize as I've done so in the past. A lot of the criticism in the thread are just rants that aren't going to accomplish anything and simply set up the rantee for more disappointment down the line.
I've chosen to stick with sketchup (well I'm studying rhino now to handle some of my more complicated needs) so in essence, I've chosen to stick with the way sketchup is being developed. I'm just not in the mood lately for bitching about a piece if software. Especially when I feel a straight rant isn't going to help a thing. -
At Bop Pineo.
EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT tutorial!!! I crown you the Aidan Choppra of SketchUcation.
Thank you.Can you post a link to your video in the SketchUp Tutorial forum as well?
-
Wanna hear a rant though? I'm so sick of people demanding all these visualization functions so they can beautify their rather stale drawing ideas.
that's about the most boring building I've seen in my life but hey look!, it's really similar to a photograph. Wonderful... Not
-
@unknownuser said:
Wanna hear a rant though? I'm so sick of people demanding all these visualization functions so they can beautify their rather stale drawing ideas.
that's about the most boring building I've seen in my life but hey look!, it's really similar to a photograph. Wonderful... Not
Yes, we definitly need a "Uglify" plugin.
-
-
@mrwip said:
Actually, when someone says on the forum “we should add this function”, I'm really sad to see that there is always someone to respond “no, no, keep sketchup simple”... that classical answer clearly shows that there’s no innovative research in term of interface going on.
What a load of arrogant nonsense! It is precisely SketchUp's innovative interface that makes SU so easy to use. My 6 year-old daughter was building houses within 20 minutes of first using SU's innovative interface. How many other titles out there can claim this? Blender? 3DS Max? Cinema 4D? Heck! I can't even figure these apps out straight away, yet alone a 6 year old child! Drown SU in multifaceted buttons and devices, and the interface bombs.
Look at any design which has lasted. Take the humble transistor FM radio. An on/off button. A volume control, and a tuning dial. Simple as anything, but it works, and is reliable. You can turn it on and be listening to the radio straight away. Anything with menus and a over complicated interface, and you're ready to throw the damn thing out of the window (DAB for eg).
Advertisement