These look like some of the best productivity tools that have been implemented in a long time. Just hope that they don't introduce a whole raft of new bugs…
I agree on the 'small details' comment. Seems like some of them that would make a tool 'complete' get left behind for one reason or another. Or maybe just weren't thought of in development.A group item in the design tree needs to show the number of elements it contains. Small details that add polish and a sense of complete thought to the implementation!
Looking forward to seeing the full list of new stuff and fixed stuff ... plus a planned release date!
@Max, Where/how do the changes to 3DConexxion get accessed? Is there a new menu of sorts? Do we need the latest drivers in order to make them available?Changes to 3DConnexion will occur in v27. It is possible, based on feedback, that further changes will be required. We have done what we believe will satisfy most people, and we will now validate that. Incremental satisfaction from what we've already done for v27 requires a different approach and a non-trivially increased time budget, so we wanted to do the easiest and most obvious things first. So there will be an improvement in v27 for sure, and then the question is whether it is enough.
Toolbox appears only in Assembly workspace.I am not seeing the button for the toolbox in the ribbon!
So, you have to open an assembly, create a part based on the toolbox, then open the part to finish the part, i.e. add chamfers, holes, etc? ... Would make more sense if you could create a base part from a toolbox 'template' and then customise that 'basic' part, whilst in the part editor! My use case for the toolbox would be for generating 20x20 or 40x40 extruded rail parts or L/U channel parts from stock materials ... then complete the part with cuts and holes, etc.Toolbox appears only in Assembly workspace.
Simon - see Ralf's post #114 about creating the part - it opens what is effectively a standard part workspace, but with equation editor pre-populated with values from the spreadsheet. You set the part up there.So, you have to open an assembly, create a part based on the toolbox, then open the part to finish the part, i.e. add chamfers, holes, etc? ... Would make more sense if you could create a base part from a toolbox 'template' and then customise that 'basic' part, whilst in the part editor! My use case for the toolbox would be for generating 20x20 or 40x40 extruded rail parts or L/U channel parts from stock materials ... then complete the part with cuts and holes, etc.
The workflow from the assembly 'assumes' that the part is complete and ready to use ... which in 99% of case won't be! Would be interested in the dev rational behind the 'assembly' only implementaion.
In addition to selecting the diving dimensions, I am finding that I can add more features to the toolbox item as well as configurations which can be selected after inserting the part into an assembly. (Be careful to select the right config options when using them so you don't end up with odd results or different results when changing configs.)The Toolbox icon in assemblies is intended for inserting an already prepared part, and selecting which row of the spreadsheet drives the instance to be inserted.