The point of no return
-
Ive had a go on solidworks recently and it got me thinking.
Do large pieces of software reach a point of no return? when rewriting pieces of code would mean years of reuilding, and so old decisions have to be lived with.
Does it happen?
-
Yes I think so.
Some pieces of software end up just being dinosaurs (3DSMAx, Lightwave, etc..).
What started out as a simple concept can become quite the impossible to use software (unless you were at it from the beginning, following each step in development or you get a proper (costly) training).Actually Lewiswadsworth pointed out that risk some time ago, that sketchup should not become overfeatured as it might loose it's basic strength.
I admit that he has a point.In order to have new functionality without screwing up Sketchup's ease-to-use, development should be done with caution.
The power of Sketchup is in its simplicity, so I can imagine that adding complexer features could be done in form of 'extensions' and not so much baked into the core.
It could be a very good strategy for Google to develop the cores stability and speed and to provide a more flexible platform on which plugins/extensions can be coded.In order to make it in a final release, a new sketchup feature should be as simple as any existing one.
-
That sounds like the way to do things kwist, as then you can avoid getting in to the same situation as the dinosaur modellers, where one chage to the core architecture messes everything else up.
I suppose you still have to be careful the extensions dont start to become reliant on each other, though, as that then puts you back in the same position except with lots of extensions to mess things up!
-
Dear Remus,
Do I take it that you don't rate SolidWorks?
Regards,
Bob -
Its pretty good, and i understand its hugely powerful in the right hands, but its just so slow. Doing anything takes forever. Im not very fond of the whole parts and assembelies thing either, i prefer SUs groups and components.
Advertisement