[michaelplogue]

It's very easy It works like Studio.

I knew there was a reason why I don't use Studio....

[Thomas An.]

It's very easy It works like Studio.

I knew there was a reason why I don't use Studio....

Yeah, Studio viewport navigation is not too great. It just emulates the key mappings of one app only and the rest of us need to adapt to it. Also, some of the UI in Studio (say in regards to projectors), could be a little better ... but ... overall Studio is no comparison to the intuitiveness of Blender. Blender is on a level of its own ... and with a safe margin from the nearest unintuitive competitor. Its what happens when a UI is put on a blender (literally)... just fancy graphics, rounded edges, colors ... but ... no ergonomics (and hidden commands, lots of memorization of keys and special key combinations ... da da da ...).

[tom]

Blender is on a level of its own ... and with a safe margin from the nearest unintuitive competitor. Its what happens when a UI is put on a blender (literally)... just fancy graphics, rounded edges, colors ... but ... no ergonomics (and hidden commands, lots of memorization of keys and special key combinations ... da da da ...).

I exactly think the opposite. Isn't your prompt reaction coming from "Hey, this application has a stylish UI,, so it sucks!". Have you really used it? Honestly, I tried many different applications and I didn't have a hard time using Blender. If you were talking about ZBrush, I would agree it's not intuitive but Blender really is. For example I don't find Maya or Solidworks more intuitive just because they are industry standards. In other hand, Rhino is very intuitive. I found Blender at least as intuitive as XSI, no more. I feel it's kinda reaction to non-os looking GUIs, confess!

[Thomas An.]

Well, I have tried to use Blender a couple of times actually (so no it is not empty prejudice against pretty buttons). I also have gone through the beginner video tutorials.

It might be personal taste, but IMHO the UI of this application is substantially poor, quite illogical, non-ergonomic, human memory intensive, requires too much adaptation ... it just does not flow rationally in the deepest sense of the meaning (there are some things that humans have universally in common, the recognition of beauty and symmetry in faces regardless of culture, the application of reason, analogies, etc)... this blender application simply flunks on the most basic level, I can't describe it... but going through the tutorials I found myself shaking my head saying "simply no way this is ergonomic"

... overall I would refuse to adapt to it at all costs. (which is a shame because feature-wise the application is loaded)

[jdp]

the only problem is that I have never been able to fit it into the workflow of offices I am/was working in... to be honest this situation starts to bug me alot.

it's free, it's there, it's powerful and it also got a strong scripting ability. In small medium architecture firm can be a really strong tool. I think it's also suitable to be integrated in a strong cad environment, if only there was the interest to develop it.

I agree that the UI can look weird, particularly if u did use some other industry standard before. But in my experience I've seen a lot of people giving up once they were facing max or maya the 1st time, just for the same reason. And I can't tell u the number of user I've seen using autocad as a simple 2d drawing tool. this is why I'm not completetly sure it's a matter of easiness.

What is even worst is that I don't know a single architecture school in europe promoting the use of it, and actually this doesn't make sense at all. of course when it comes to business, people don't want to lose time in training so it lets young students, interns and also young architects work with the sfw they where use to work with before.

[michaelplogue]

Well, Poser has a fancy graphical user interface- and though I'm no fan of this particular style, it is at least pretty easy to figure out how to use without having to memorize any key commands.

[val2]

funny, Blender was my second 3D app to use (the first was turbocad) so I really had nothing to compare it to. It made sense to have a series of keystrokes over hunting down little icons that I had to decipher what they meant. not that I'm complaining about icons but for me it's all th same. either they are icons that i have to memorize or it's keystrokes I have to memorize.

the third application for modeling was 3DSmax. by that time I was used to Blender and it was annoying to learn a whole new way to understand the work flow. I'm still way faster with blender. the funniest thing is switching from one app. to the other. I find my self banging away on a set of keys and not getting what I expect until my brain switches over.
I think the only set of app.s I can't stand are the poser,bryce lot.

[tom]

Thomas;
So, I should change the word from "standards" to "habits". Because, I know the times where none of those applications existing pointed as standards. You won't give a chance to it, you won't use it. That's pretty much like we do to Linux. Everybody agrees Linux is much more powerful than Windows but majorly we're still using it and it's infected to Mac, too. Including me, we're afraid of investing our time in them. You think the UI is "quite illogical" and I think this comment is heavier than needed, exaggerated and far from reality.

[tom]

I knew there was a reason why I don't use Studio....

[Thomas An.]

It follows "some" logic ... but it is not the path of least resistance from the human ergonomic vantage point. You cannot have terms "intuitive" and "getting used to" in the same sentence.

[val2]

the words ergonomic and computers shouldn't be used in the same sentence. there is nothing ergonomic about a computer, ever. you sit in a hunched over position, wiggling your fingers over top over a plastic tray and staring at a glowing plate for hours . your body slowly decaying form lack of movement. all of your organs compressing into one painful pile.

[jdp]

Ergonomists contribute to the design and evaluation of tasks, jobs, products, environments and systems in order to make them compatible with the needs, abilities and limitations of people (IEA, 2000). Ergonomics comes into everything which involves people. Work systems, sports and leisure, health and safety should all embody ergonomics principles if well designed.

Cognitive ergonomics, also known as engineering psychology, is what you face with computers. and I completely agree with u that current computer UI design is absolutely not towards ergonomy, in no way.
Afaik there's been several studies in the past about this subject, and a couple of interesting ideas put it into (ie.: J. Ruskin and xerox team): but nothing really changed since the early 80's. Some of the intuition they had are now in mac osx, but in a way they were also messed up. If u think about it, even the idea itself of a trash can, the idea of a desktop in itself, or worst, the entire idea of application is more a matter of copyright than of real usability: why on earth the user have to know what a file type is and what application would handle it.
I personally always found at least weird that the way u switch off the machine is completely different from the way u switch it on.
Computers are really sophisticated tool and as you don't really need an optical laser-cutter in everyday life, most of the people just need a really small portion of computers in their lives.
In a way mobile phones are the real revolutionary device: they are basically easy to use, they work almost always and they get you connected. Of course industry is trying to keep away the easiness, making things more complicated so that u need a new device every once in a while.
But of course I can be completely wrong. sorry for the small OT.

[JDHill]

Bytes flowing through a processor...that's a computer. Everything else is abstraction...the command line...the GUI...all abstraction...there is no such thing as a file tree...they are all invented to insulate you from the bytes. In the scope of human history, computers are not even yet born...the current state of the art will be seen as inconceivably crude in the future.

Therefore, I give room for developers to try different things (e.g. Blender's OpenGL interface, which I don't like), nobody's forcing anyone to use it. To concretely define what defines 'ergonomic' for UI at this point in history would be severely short-sighted...the foundation to build it on is ultimately temporal. The urge to create some kind of compulsory standard (@Thomas: UI police?) is natural, but can serve only to deter the creation of future models which have the potential of obsoleting everything that very standard is built on. How many years was the geocentric solar model religiously adhered to, even though it was scientifically known to be flawed? ...narrow-mindedness ultimately hampers progress.

It can be argued as well, that there is only 'like/dislike' in UI design...for evidence, no need to look any further than this very thread.

[giacob]

i love blender... is such a ...beatitifull almost complet programm. ......ad it is free!!!!
the gui... ..once u overcame the first difficulties .. u will find it to be best... or one of the best .. and it is very simple and highly customizable...... at least that is my experience...
... come one dont be lazy guys!!!! give it deeper try.... it is worthwhile

[michaelplogue]

... is such a ...beatitifull almost complet programm. ......ad it is free!!!!

That definitivly is something to consider seriously...... Much better than keeping up with my 3ds Max subscription every year.....