| A) Multiple ways to view the Feature Manager – strict history view, strict dependency, view multiple derived parts structure at once, flat view, not absorption or indentation, strict hierarchy with full indentation. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| B) More Flexible FM folders – being able to put any feature/s in a folder regardless of parametric/history order. Ability to nest a folder in a folder etc. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| C) Ability to delete any feature without deleting any children features (leaving them dangling). | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| D) Ability to be more flexible in reorder of features – reorder features automatically breaking and keeping dependencies, reorder multiple features a one time. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| E) Better performance – i.e. part gets so big, might as well start over. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| F) As part and/or assembly grows (number of features increase) robustness of part is unaffected – much better in tracking and maintaining dependencies when changes in the FM are made. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| G) Ability to make feature redefine/modification complete for ALL sketch entities and features. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| H) More professional (quality) functionality and/or surface quality capabilities for final design. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|
| I) Better education and best practices on how to work conceptually in SW in order to successfully use it for the final design. | | | | | | | | | |
|---|