hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 28 replies
  • Subscribers 18 subscribers
  • Views 603 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

PC-DMIS Enhancements via Google Moderator

Brian Gudauskas
Have any of you ever used Google Moderator? Google Moderator

I'm considering starting one for forum users for PC-DMIS enhancements. Thoughts?

It wouldn't be "official", it'd be something I use to help forum users vote on their most requested enhancement.

It's just an idea based off of the many requests I get.

thanks.
Parents
  • Labview and PC-DMIS are simply in different leagues with what they have to accomplish, number of seats (millions for Labview, do the math on that), etc.

    My moderator suggestion was directed only at the "they never put in what we want", I was hoping to collect votes on popular ideas that maybe we miss because users don't want to call technical support to ask for them.

    You guys all think that less releases is what everyone wants, but I constantly hear complaints when we don't support a new probe, or a Windows 64, or new versions of CAD, etc etc. Even Windows updates cause us to have to update often. It's very hard to please everyone, so I was hoping for a way to find out what was really desired.

    I'm open to other ideas. Telling me "just fix it" won't work, I know that already. And it's already central to everything we (including myself) are doing. Along with being most used and most loved, comes most picked on. We always need to do better, and we will.


    PS: Moving this thread, I put in CMM's because it's more PC-DMIS, but then it's really not for CMM's only.

    So it is OK that Hexagon releases bad code, because they do not ship many seats? You lost me on the logic there. You're the biggest in this industry!

    I realize what you try to accomplish. And this is not a bad idea. However, I am worried that it is another idea that will not get anything accomplished. Maybe more disjointed options that cause problems with code that used to work for years.

    Why not fix the serialization:alt issue, the one that eats programs? This error has been reported since I started posting on this board. These types of issues should be the number one priority. But it is still out there, worse in 2010 than in 4.3. I can not understand why it is acceptable to Hexagon to keep releasing code that has this bug in it.

    I have to admit, I gave up on suggesting new stuff. If I can't get real issues fixed, why worry about getting more features? Get my real issues fixed and then let's talk about adding stuff.
Reply
  • Labview and PC-DMIS are simply in different leagues with what they have to accomplish, number of seats (millions for Labview, do the math on that), etc.

    My moderator suggestion was directed only at the "they never put in what we want", I was hoping to collect votes on popular ideas that maybe we miss because users don't want to call technical support to ask for them.

    You guys all think that less releases is what everyone wants, but I constantly hear complaints when we don't support a new probe, or a Windows 64, or new versions of CAD, etc etc. Even Windows updates cause us to have to update often. It's very hard to please everyone, so I was hoping for a way to find out what was really desired.

    I'm open to other ideas. Telling me "just fix it" won't work, I know that already. And it's already central to everything we (including myself) are doing. Along with being most used and most loved, comes most picked on. We always need to do better, and we will.


    PS: Moving this thread, I put in CMM's because it's more PC-DMIS, but then it's really not for CMM's only.

    So it is OK that Hexagon releases bad code, because they do not ship many seats? You lost me on the logic there. You're the biggest in this industry!

    I realize what you try to accomplish. And this is not a bad idea. However, I am worried that it is another idea that will not get anything accomplished. Maybe more disjointed options that cause problems with code that used to work for years.

    Why not fix the serialization:alt issue, the one that eats programs? This error has been reported since I started posting on this board. These types of issues should be the number one priority. But it is still out there, worse in 2010 than in 4.3. I can not understand why it is acceptable to Hexagon to keep releasing code that has this bug in it.

    I have to admit, I gave up on suggesting new stuff. If I can't get real issues fixed, why worry about getting more features? Get my real issues fixed and then let's talk about adding stuff.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement