Opus 5.5 is, generally speaking, a much better model than Sol 6.1. But I usually see that sol can discover much more edge cases than opus, and it's much cheaper (as in, subscription usage as well as token costs).
All text, but none of these were a one-shot task. There were a few serious gotchas that you need to pay close attention to. It understands problems VERY well when it actually controls the viewport and takes screenshots of the part, unfortunately it REALLY resists that instead preferring to make up a bunch of equations to justify/validate it but these were almost never correct. It frequently got things like axis backwards so when it would test for a potential collision it would test in the wrong direction. Guidance specifically for the axes might help there, I suspect it's assuming different real-world axis (maybe more aligned with the game industry axis than modeling or CAD axis standards).
When I approached those two projects I took different approaches. The workbench I had clear measured physical requirements and desires but no specific design in mind (such as number or size of drawers). I had a long back and forth working out a purely textual project description via Fable chat, I originally wasn't even going to model it in CAD and just build from the textual description. I had just seen someone else post success with FreeCAD + MCP and there were some measurements that were suspect... So I had it model it. It did pretty good entirely on its own but a wood bench is composed of effectively a bunch of differently sized rectangles oriented and put together correctly so it feels like this was an "easy task" for it to complete.
The other side of the coin was that inverted differential omni-wheel. This one I knew mechanically exactly what needed to happen and I wanted to model to make a parametric, re-usable model that could be dropped in to a bunch of different designs. This one needs some complex gearing built which it actually mostly did pretty well. Where it kept failing here was weirdly in the motor placement (it was a stock placeholder mesh of the motor part), it had a sled mount with screw slots to allow a little adjustment of the meshing of the final gears. Over half of my time working with the model was simply trying to get it to point the motor model in the correct direction, fully seated in the sled, with the screw slots accessible and physically not colliding with anything. The next hardest part was composite/boolean joined parts, specifically a couple of gears that are a combination of crown and pinion gear, it couldn't seem to comprehend that adding the two physical objects together wouldn't remove excess material from around one of the sets of teeth.
Kind of a ramble, but let me know if there are any more specifics I can provide.
The first thing I look for on that kind of page is a screenshot. Those shouldn't be so far down. Also way before showing your app, you show a massive video of a leaf, that's not what people are looking for.
It has a few annoyances. For example it doesn't let you see which email address the sender used, or to which of your email addresses it was sent, instead it only shows the person's name. Also it can't attach pictures without having them inline.
Exactly. My company mandates Chrome or Edge with no extensions for work, and the SSO only works with these. I use Firefox in the side for browsing because IT doesn’t control it and I can block ads.
It's getting more common but it's still not practical.
Typically on the web you need to select your bank, get redirected to your bank's website with a pre-filled transfer you validate, approve 2FA on your phone app, and then the purchase gets confirmed only 1 or 2 business days later when the transfer gets received.
I see small businesses just give you their IBAN too, and you need to manually add it and make a transfer. Not seamless at all.
reply