Here are a few more examples of unnecessary mouse use due to concealed information.  Correcting just this one issue would significantly lower the RSI risk and increase the usability of the program. Such changes should be relatively easy to implement.

See to the left how, with plenty of vertical space available, only 4 of the 9 lines of conflicts are shown!  Instead of viewing all the conflicts in a large  window (dynamically resized?), and then selecting the appropriate one with a single click, the user is forced to make small, high-tension, RSI-causing scroll movements in order to view and select the constraints. 

Below:  Here you are again requiring the user to make unsafe scroll movements to reveal choices concealed by windows that are unnecessarily small.  Look at all the space available!  Make information visible without having to get RSI looking for it. 

I might add that if the “OK” and “Cancel” buttons were larger, they would require less  precision to target, lowering muscular tension and RSI risk in the mouse hand.

Here to the left the View function again.  Although  there is plenty of space for radio buttons, you require the user to click a check box to view or select the other “Default Orientation” options.  Another 100% increase in RSI risk!

To the right is the same problem again in a different place.  If the 4 orientations had radio buttons beside them you would avoid unnecessarily clicking the check box to make them visible.  Another 100% increase in RSI risk!    Usability tip:  Placing the “Use Previous” button above or below the name of the sketch plane would allow its name to be fully displayed.

Below are two more examples of the infamous check boxes in the Assembly function. Radio buttons would make the settings selectable with  only one click, instead, you force the user to double their mouse use by making them click the check box first.  Another 100% increase in RSI risk!

Here another check box in Protrusion with a small scroll revealing only two extra choices.  Either make all radio buttons, or if you must hide things behind a check box then make a mouseover out of it, and make the fold-out menu large enough to avoid a scroll bar.

To the left is the “Round” function:  The notorious check box returns, this time hiding only 2 other choices. Notice the miniscule “References” scroll bar.  Please take a good look at how small that scroll bar is.  The word “sadistic” comes to mind.  Pressing and holding the arrows is not much better.  Can you see how using these function over and over and over again each day increases the RSI risk?

Make the whole window larger so there is space for radio buttons and a large “References” window, so you can see and choose all references without scrolling.  If you really want to make me happy, you could show the first few sets side by side, so you wouldn’t have to toggle between them.

To the right you should make the Dimension Properties window a bit larger and include the text symbols in it.  You could also add some standard Postfixes, such as “(2x)”, “(3x)”, etc. for the number of dimensions of a certain value (common in Europe).  Alternately you should provide for making your own custom Pre- and Postfixes.  Things like this should be standard in the program, and not something the user should have to make a mapkey for.

ANALYSIS

Here we are back at the Analysis function, which in my opinion is worse than ever and should be completely redone.  I’m always having  to uncheck the “use center axis”, and check the “use as plane” boxes which are each 3-click RSI-risk increasers.  In order to click those check boxes, you need to first get to them to begin with by clicking the “Definition” tab.  Look at how small the window is!  Making the window wider to begin with would have made the tabs at the top unnecessary. A plaintiff would only need to benchmark Wildfire 2 Analysis against any of your previous versions to demonstrate an increase in RSI risk to the court.

Look at the model tree on the left.  If you have several columns visible, you must constantly resize the first column width in order to see the function names, because the default width is narrower than the default function names.  This gets to be a big pain because it needs to be redone every single time you open the model.  If you have the settings saved, then you need to apply those every single time.  Every Single Time!!!!  “Little things” like this that have to be done EVERY SINGLE TIME really start adding up, especially since these frustrating things don’t have to be that way, but are based on some default settings that you could easily change. 

How Analysis should be:

Shown to the right  is the result of control-selecting two surfaces and then right-clicking.  What should also show up is “Analysis”.  Upon clicking that, you should get a window showing all distances between the surfaces – center axis to plane and surface, cylindrical surface to surface (closest distance) and plane.  You would then select the result you want with your eyes, rather than with RSI-inducing mouse use.  The computer you are sitting at, after all, can calculate and present information much faster than the time you spend asking it to do something for you.  Let the computer do the work of presenting information, rather than having to hunt for it with your mouse hand.

When editing this sketch definition, I first get a blank screen.  A click on “reframe” gives me the screen you see below right.  From there it is 7-9 additional and completely unnecessary (mouse and keyboard) clicks and mouse movements to reframe the sketch and make it usable. 

(see below left)

I say unnecessary because, although these actions are necessary with ProE, they are not necessary with benchmark products Catia V5 and SolidWorks.

This is terribly frustrating, because, in addition, every time I change one dimension and press the return key, the sketch jumps back to what you see above.  I then have to again perform the same RSI-causing 7-9 mouse-and keyboard clicks and mouse movements to get back to a usable sketch. 

Every single time!  Changing the spin center does not help in this case.  This does not happen with every sketch, of course, but it happens too often.  It should not happen for any reason, including lack of ProE knowledge of the user, if that is the cause.

FURTHER RSI-RISK LOWERING IDEAS

Many more examples of high RSI risk in all areas of the program could be given.  Here are just a few more areas where the RSI risk must be lowered: 

The operation of the functions themselves:  Having used both Catia V5 and SolidWorks, I can vouch for the fact that ProE can be demonstrated to be much more high-risk than they.

Pop-up windows sometimes cover up functions or the model tree, when access to them is needed.  This requires grab-and-dragging the pop-up to the side.  Pop-up windows also often have to be resized before they are useful (more unnecessary mouse use due to concealed information).

The Windchill/PDM interface requires a lot of unnecessary scrolls.

Why doesn’t the program automatically open the sketch setup box anymore when making a new protrusion?  The sketch setup and references windows could be presented together, eliminating the need to open them with extra mouse use.