it can be erratic in windoze also

imo tweak is worth looking at from a refinement perspective - it has never been easy to use - for me at least - when it works, usually when I have allowed enough space, freedom for it to work, it will work as advertised, often with great results. Tweak is very powerful and useful tool as it is.
I don't think we should be doing reactive changes to the tool without proper investigation.

@spmm

I use tweak frequently, and I do test every sheet in every puzzle for small increases in rotation & straightening. Because the tool is not standardized, sometimes a quick click moves it - sometimes you need to hold the mouse button down - sometimes you need to hold it down for a few seconds. When it "sticks" (ie, needing to hold it down until there is movement), it usually jumps to a second or third pose quickly, which means resetting and trying again very carefully to catch the first score dip.

It wastes much time when it acts like that. I am requesting that if possible it somehow be standardized or calibrated so that the first score dip is easier to stop at.

I know that other people use tweak for massive movements, however. It was with that in mind that I suggested that those folders also be accommodated in some way - I can't imagine that they want to have to click 50 times to get to the pose they want.

Tweak is one of our most powerful hand tools at the moment - because it can't be scripted right now. So my request is simply that we have a better ability to use it for either fine tuning or gross movement.

@dee we are in agreement,
I was sounding a note of caution about reactive fixes - tweak is complex and used in many different ways as you say and I don't disagree with your suggestion, just feel that it needs more investigation of where the problem(s) is.

As players perhaps we could expand on the way the tool is used and the problems experienced with each method, I am also not sure if it works differently in the advanced and selection interfaces.

It is also not entirely clear to me exactly how the tweak tool, including flip, is influenced by the pose, surrounding residues, side chains, CI and other slider settings.

So consistently trying each method on test areas of a puzzle would highlight the problems; is it working differently with sheets and helixes for example, are the problems the same? One would perhaps expect that the tool may respond differently in different puzzles or in different parts of the same puzzle.

I'm happy to assist with testing which would highlight all of the issues and make it easier to validate any fixes, as the same tests could be run on any update.

I agree that tweaking is painfully slow, even with CI reduced. I would though like to see it's functionality available via Lua (manually moving bits and pieces of the protein about provides near limitless scope for creative hand folding): there was a feedback a little while ago (can't find it right now) that pointed out there was reference to this in scripting help. They seem to be placeholders though as they neither do anything nor give an error.

Idle thought: could the idea behind Register Shift be extended to helices too? Perhaps one shift would "rotate the screw" by 60 degrees. It would be quite useful on helix-rich puzzles and would certainly generate varying structures.

Using a mouse to tweak is very unpredictable. It would be useful to offer a dialog box that allows one to type in a numerical value that corresponds to the degree of rotation desired.

One way to solve that without changing the UI would be to add an API for tweak to the LUA scripting, then create a script that allows precise tweaks. I was trying to get that in, but ran out of time.

Bump for tamirh's request about GUI fixes -

Please note my expanded comment on this above.

Thanks!