3 ms·

I've been using it to do some basic 3D printed designs, and it has all of the features you mention. I haven't had to write any Python so far. The main issues w

by Fwirt 2y ago

I've been using it to do some basic 3D printed designs, and it has all of the features you mention. I haven't had to write any Python so far. The main issues with FreeCAD are those common to most open-source software applications like GIMP. You can accomplish almost anything that you can with professional software, but the UI is obtuse, at times buggy, and the process is going to involve way more steps, plugins, and hidden menus. I use it because it's one of the few CAD packages that runs on MacOS and has a viable free tier. Most other CAD free tiers are crippled or have bizarre licensing agreements. If you decide to give it a shot, I highly recommend using realthunder's branch, which massively improves the topological naming problem issue that the main branch struggles with. It also includes the plugin that adds the "assembly with constraints" feature. https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD This YouTube channel has some great FreeCAD tutorialss. FreeCAD operates very much under a TIMTWOTDI philsophy. https://www.youtube.com/@MangoJellySolutions https://www.youtube.com/@MangoJellySolutions

mushufasa 2y ago
As someone who develops professional software in a private company, we absolutely 1) built a lot of features fast based on user requests, which created a clunky UI. Now, we're 2) doing a redesign which, while not a total code refactor, requires discipline and cohesion to reflect deeply on what use-cases we want to support specifically, as opposed to trying to be everything to everyone. We're incentivized to do this because we can grow revenue by building well crafted software for the most popular use-cases. We just expect that this is a "circle of life" for well crafted software, of 1) building features fast, then 2) polishing the best features leveraging professional ui/ux designers and product insights: to re-simplify once you reach a certain level of complexity. I now think of most open source projects as just as good as closed-source at 1) building the functionality and MVP UI/UX, but that there is more friction to communication overhead to do 2), as well as less incentives (smaller carrot, smaller stick). To decide on specific priorities, bring in a designer (who might be non-technical) that can fully understand the context, and then potentially change or move around a bunch of code, is not something that "just happens organically by people scratching their own itch" I think projects that are high profile like blender have done better here over time, often when there are well resourced and governed foundations or companies backing them. Or occasionally an OSS author will do this. Though I think that's the exception rather than the rule, and certainly requires a larger breadth of skills that extend beyond pure technical ability.
riidom 2y ago
Whoever else doesn't know: TIMTOWTDI = "there's more than one way to do it"

by Fwirt 2y ago

mushufasa 2y ago

As someone who develops professional software in a private company, we absolutely 1) built a lot of features fast based on user requests, which created a clunky UI. Now, we're 2) doing a redesign which, while not a total code refactor, requires discipline and cohesion to reflect deeply on what use-cases we want to support specifically, as opposed to trying to be everything to everyone. We're incentivized to do this because we can grow revenue by building well crafted software for the most popular use-cases. We just expect that this is a "circle of life" for well crafted software, of 1) building features fast, then 2) polishing the best features leveraging professional ui/ux designers and product insights: to re-simplify once you reach a certain level of complexity. I now think of most open source projects as just as good as closed-source at 1) building the functionality and MVP UI/UX, but that there is more friction to communication overhead to do 2), as well as less incentives (smaller carrot, smaller stick). To decide on specific priorities, bring in a designer (who might be non-technical) that can fully understand the context, and then potentially change or move around a bunch of code, is not something that "just happens organically by people scratching their own itch" I think projects that are high profile like blender have done better here over time, often when there are well resourced and governed foundations or companies backing them. Or occasionally an OSS author will do this. Though I think that's the exception rather than the rule, and certainly requires a larger breadth of skills that extend beyond pure technical ability.

riidom 2y ago

Whoever else doesn't know: TIMTOWTDI = "there's more than one way to do it"