Document interaction in Prime is so awkward and time-consuming that it makes users mutter, "This is garbage," (or words to that effect) and swear never to to use Prime again. That can't be good for marketing or sales.
These simple actions - moving around in a document, cutting/copying and pasting regions from one place to another, expanding and collapsing areas, editing equations and programs, and so on - are performed constantly when developing a worksheet. Making them easy to do should be a design priority. Yet, in that area, Prime is perhaps the worst of all significant Windows programs.
It's serious. Although lack of some advanced features may disappoint users, document interaction problems actually repel them. Fixing those problems should be a priority, if only to keep PTC's user base.
Some are listed below in the hope that they will be fixed. Anyone care to add to the list?
* Prime is slow and unresponsive. The delayed imaging of characters when typing in a text box is merely irritating. However, the multisecond delays after each keystroke when editing a long program make Prime useless, since you don't know what it is doing or whether it is even responding. Even programs that are half a page long suffer half-second delays after every single keystroke. This is not acceptable in what PTC calls "the industry standard." Similarly, 5-second delays in expanding/collapsing areas. The big worry: it feels like a fundamental problem with the code, not a quick fix, one that will persist for version after version. If it's still in Prime 4, then we can assume that it will never be fixed and that Prime will never be a useable package.
* Page up/down to move through documents is useless. The cursor travels with the up/down action and, when it lands in a text region (as it will, sooner or later), the PgUp PgDn keys don't work anymore. You then have to click near the margin to reposition the cursor, and try page up/down until it gets stuck yet again.
* For moving around in documents, PTC, please don't suggest use of the scroll bar, instead. On long documents the scroll bar doesn't give enough resolution to put you in the place you want. You just get close, at which point you try the page up/down keys, with their own frustrations just noted.
* Moving regions is time-consuming. Like Mathcad, Prime lets you select one or more regions by running the mouse across them with the button held down, so you can cut or copy them as a group. Unlike Mathcad, you cannot then move them by clicking anywhere in regions and dragging. Instead, you have to position the cursor carefully on the edge of a region and drag, or use the arrow keys. It doesn't sound like much, but it costs time, and users need to develop worksheets quickly. It's unfortunate, because we went through this with Mathcad, too, when versions 10 to 12 (?) required careful positioning of the cursor on the edge of a region.
* No space made for pasted regions. In editing, we might have put one or more regions on the clipboard. We then click to put the cursor where we want to paste them. Prime doesn't move nearby regions to make space for them, and the pasted regions overlap with nearby ones. To be fair, this is true of Mathcad, too, but it would be a welcome fix.
* No Paste Special. When writing a report, we might create calculations resulting in a plot. In the discussion that follows, we want to display a set of plots, each for a different set of parameters. In Mathcad, we simply select each instance of the plot by running the mouse over it (dotted lines), then Paste Special> Windows Metafile to put a non-computable image in the discussion section. Not possible in Prime, though. Paste puts a computable plot on the page, and it transforms as usual with parameter changes. The only workaround is cumbersome: Paste Special in some other application, like Word, where it appears as a bitmap, then copy that image to the clipboard for pasting back into Prime. Really slow, and the final image quality is poor.
A few great points Jim. I believe most of them have been covered before, but nevertheless, worthwhile repeating.
Yes, I've found that most of those points have been covered before, though scattered across different threads. I'm hoping that other forum participants will add to the list here, so that we have a reasonably comprehensive list in one thread. Other problem categories, other threads. At some point, we might have an "unpopularity contest" via an online poll to identify the five (say) most egregious problems in each category, and toss the results over the wall into Fortress PTC.
I'm doing this because, in two or three years, we won't have Mathcad 15. Or, rather, we'll have it, but it probably won't work in a later Windows version. We'll have only Prime, then, so it's in our interests to give PTC the clearest signals we can now, and goad them, as well as we can, to act on our "demands."
Jim Cavers wrote:
I'm doing this because, in two or three years, we won't have Mathcad 15. Or, rather, we'll have it, but it probably won't work in a later Windows version. We'll have only Prime, then, so it's in our interests to give PTC the clearest signals we can now, and goad them, as well as we can, to act on our "demands."
Good idea Jim and you have my backing (what it's worth!!!).
A brilliant analysis Jim as it covers the need of editing and not only the mere functionalities. It resonates what my main objection is to Prime: it's poor ergonomics.
I found the poor resolution of the ribbon, the poor visibility of the editing cursor and the constant need to switch between keyboard and mouse a major millstone. When adding your findings then it is clear to me that the problems of prime run even deeper than a poorly designed user interface.
Raiko
Sorry, Jim!
Mathcad 15 is Mathcad 15.
Prime is Prime.
I use both and no problem.
In future I cannot use Mathcad 15 - I can use unly new Prime.
We can compare also documents created in Mathcad and in Maple. And what?!
I'm curious, Valery - you use both Mathcad 15 and Prime, which implies that you find Prime better for some purposes. Could you say what you use Prime for?
Comparison of Mathcad 15 and Maple would be interesting. However, if we can keep a focus on Prime shortcomings in this thread, we might - might - be able to influence PTC in its development. (I'm trying not to lapse back into cynicism for the time being.)
BTW, your posts on this forum over the years have helped me greatly.
Jim
Jim Cavers wrote:
I'm curious, Valery - you use both Mathcad 15 and Prime, which implies that you find Prime better for some purposes. Could you say what you use Prime for?
Comparison of Mathcad 15 and Maple would be interesting. However, if we can keep a focus on Prime shortcomings in this thread, we might - might - be able to influence PTC in its development. (I'm trying not to lapse back into cynicism for the time being.)
BTW, your posts on this forum over the years have helped me greatly.
Jim
See (poll) please - http://communities.ptc.com/polls/1141
And one example (water solution NaCl convert):
I like that concept for a poll - doing it in reverse, to add new abilities to MC 15 from Prime. I wonder if rejuvenating MC 15 is even possible, though. Perhaps the code is too old and too full of patches for any new feature to be added. In retrospect, it might have been better if PTC had gone for a thorough cleanup of 15, instead of the massively buggy rewrite that is Prime.
Here's how I would vote. Prime has fixed a perpetual bug in MC 15, and I wish it could be ported back. In MC 15, any text near the right margin is partly clipped off when you print it. The problem is obvious even with Print Preview. There's a workaround (make the right margin large during development, then decrease it temporarily when printing), but we shouldn't have to do that.
Jim Cavers wrote:
I like that concept for a poll - doing it in reverse, to add new abilities to MC 15 from Prime. I wonder if rejuvenating MC 15 is even possible, though. Perhaps the code is too old and too full of patches for any new feature to be added. In retrospect, it might have been better if PTC had gone for a thorough cleanup of 15, instead of the massively buggy rewrite that is Prime.
I think Mathcad 15 could have been developed further, but believe it has a shelf life and won't be compatible with future versions of Windows.
I'll add a couple:
Scrolling through a large matrix of results is all but impossible.
Having to hunt and peck through the ribbon for operators etc is really slow. Basic stuff needs to be available with one click from a toolbar, or right click and select an option.
Richard Jackson wrote:
I'll add a couple:
Having to hunt and peck through the ribbon for operators etc is really slow. Basic stuff needs to be available with one click from a toolbar, or right click and select an option.
Floating toolbars? Wha we asked for after Prime 1.0!
I saw what you meant about arrays just today, Richard. So awkward! I wonder why they didn't just mimic what MC 15 does, instead of build something new and poorer.
And speaking of array display, they have done away with Display as matrix (i.e., instead of table). That was very handy, for arrays that weren't giant, because we could click on the right hand side - the array - and copy it to the clipboard, then assign that value to another matrix. It's a way of saving output from run after run that doesn't involve writing to one or more text files, ones that then have to accompany the mathcad file wherever it goes.
I suspect that part of the reason we see so many design fumbles in Prime is that the people doing the design and coding don't actually use Mathcad or Prime. They just get a notion of how to do something and implement it, without testing to see what it would be like in use.
Jim Cavers wrote:
I suspect that part of the reason we see so many design fumbles in Prime is that the people doing the design and coding don't actually use Mathcad or Prime. They just get a notion of how to do something and implement it, without testing to see what it would be like in use.
I think they do extensively test it, but as programmers and not professionals who use it.
Actually, they have users test it in "usability" labs. They just don't always listen to them. I pointed out the problem with scrolling through large arrays years ago. Nothing happened.
Richard Jackson wrote:
Actually, they have users test it in "usability" labs. They just don't always listen to them. I pointed out the problem with scrolling through large arrays years ago. Nothing happened.
A bit pointless asking users to test then.
Funny enough I was scanning through that thread this morning - it a little heated for a while!!!
A bit pointless asking users to test then.
I didn't say they never listen
Funny enough I was scanning through that thread this morning - it a little heated for a while!!!
There are several heated threads on the subject of Prime, but what I meant was that I pointed it out in a usability lab.
Richard Jackson wrote:
There are several heated threads on the subject of Prime, but what I meant was that I pointed it out in a usability lab.
And they never rectified the problem..... Doesn't bode ell for the future, does it?
Mike Armstrong wrote:
Richard Jackson wrote:
There are several heated threads on the subject of Prime, but what I meant was that I pointed it out in a usability lab.
And they never rectified the problem..... Doesn't bode ell for the future, does it?
Because I guess they don't see it as a drawback. They seem to be so proud about their new uncomfortable interface so the attitiude is something like "look, we can make it differently - its so cool!". They definitely don't USE their own software.
Werner Exinger wrote:
Mike Armstrong wrote:
Richard Jackson wrote:
There are several heated threads on the subject of Prime, but what I meant was that I pointed it out in a usability lab.
And they never rectified the problem..... Doesn't bode ell for the future, does it?
Because I guess they don't see it as a drawback. They seem to be so proud about their new uncomfortable interface so the attitiude is something like "look, we can make it differently - its so cool!". They definitely don't USE their own software.
Surley they would receive much more satisfaction if the forum and general feedback from users was positive.
I'm interested in PTC and user advice more recently - say, since Prime 2. Have there been any usability labs in that time? Has anyone in this forum been able to communicate bug reports, problems or suggestions to PTC? And received a response?
I'm just wondering if the Prime section of PTC has gone deaf as a deliberate policy.
Jim Cavers wrote:
I'm interested in PTC and user advice more recently - say, since Prime 2. Have there been any usability labs in that time? Has anyone in this forum been able to communicate bug reports, problems or suggestions to PTC? And received a response?
I'm just wondering if the Prime section of PTC has gone deaf as a deliberate policy.
Jim,
I am not sure on the usability labs, but can confirm they PTC undertook beta testing for Prime 3.0 which I was a part of.
Mike