Ben

Moderators
  • Content count

    1,539
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About Ben

  • Rank
    Fully-breaded Cat

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Nottingham, England
  • Interests
    Computers, music, films, photography.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,078 profile views
  1. You need to add some <sarcasm></sarcasm> markers. But, I still feel it's worth pointing out that we are no cheap clone.
  2. Actually, I could give you a list of features that show that we are not "just copying Illustrator", but I feel I'd be wasting valuable time that I could otherwise spend working on new features.
  3. No, we are definitely NOT copying Illustrator. Firstly, I am the one that wrote both the snapping and grids/axis features, and I can tell you that I did not copy Illustrator at all. I actually worked to a set of use cases, and fitted tools to a set of requirements. Any similarities will be due to arriving at similar conclusions, but through a logical process. I can also tell you that what we are doing with grids and axes in 1.7 is stuff that is going to be unique, and is most certainly NOT copied from any other software. I also have no idea what you mean by "inventing snapping tolerance".... the idea of "tolerance" is not exactly original, and the idea of snapping something that exists within distance of another thing most certainly is not a unique concept to Illustrator. Try using some other packages for 2D, 3D, etc, etc, etc. They all offer snapping using some notion of tolerance - how on earth else would you do it!?!?!?!?!?
  4. Sorry, I am not really sure what you are saying? No basic tools? As for development time, we have developed our apps a lot faster than some of the big competition (no names). Our v1 release is more feature rich than most first release software. As for "not knowing where we are going" - you could not be more wrong!!! We have a very good idea where we are going, but our policy is to only release features when they are up to a standard that we are happy with. Pushing out a half-baked solution just fixes a poor implementation in history - as is very clear in some other packages where they are now "stuck" with some bad choices. And, one thing we are definitely NOT doing, is just copying Illustrator! Try reading some professional reviews on that front.
  5. Childish...? There is the option to make the icons monotone, if that's what you are getting at....
  6. I mean written document. Open the Help, and search for "expressions for field input"
  7. You know, we do have documentation that covers a lot of this stuff.......
  8. "Everything is awesome".... (for anyone who's seen the Lego movie) Go one better - if you have a specific size, try putting that in the width field, then "w * sin(25)" in the height field. Then it'll be created to the correct size without needing to post-scale. Like JET says, there is room for improving on these tools, and I'll try figure out ways of streamlining these things as I get further into it. ....I do have a very long to-do list though, so I may have to flip between what I'm working on.
  9. I will be trying some things in 1.7 to help alleviate this. We won't be dropping selection changes in history (that is fairly inbuilt to the way our app works), but what we will do is find some way to better accommodate what people do around a selection, and avoid accidental selection changes from obliterating your redo history.
  10. We always want to get ahead. We also want to try break the mould and offer things that others haven't yet thought of. A lot of what I'm working on is coming out of my head, rather than referencing other apps. Just imagining what I'd like to be able to achieve and fitting tools to do the job.
  11. It will be... subject to snapping options in the usual way.
  12. Please can you upload any files you find in these temporary folders, so that I can examine them. Thanks.
  13. Nice. My "phase 2" for grids was going to focus on palettes of grids, and grid origins, for this very purpose. Of course, virtual rulers/guides, adhering to the current grid plane will achieve a lot of this. There is plenty more work to be done here, and carefully thought on how it will work alongside existing tools. I also imagine that the key to defining complementary grids is to use some notion of a cube with Azimuth/Elevation control. I have some ideas for that. Maybe more on that later.
  14. @JET_Affinity I'm interested to hear your ideas for tools supporting traditional axonometric drawing. I try and write tools that satisfy use cases, rather than referencing existing software first - thinking outside the box. So, inspiration from how you'd choose to work would help.