Beta bugs follow up

Thanks to Mark Biasotti of SolidWorks, we have some answers for some of the questions in my last post:

Radius or Diameter?

This is what Mark has to say:

A number of use here conferred today and we agree with your assessment that when drawing circles, logically the Diameter dimension checkbox should be checked by default. We don’t know why it was not checked by default other than just an error on our part. We will try to get this fix in a near future SP. We also have a few other minor grammatical issues as well as the consideration of adding a diameter numerical box to the PM. Please note that for the meantime, it is a system option so setting it once should keep it on by default between sessions of SW.
Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Well, that’s good to know. Thanks, Mark.

Colors?

Mark has defended the Appearances thing pretty vigorously. He was the one who broke the news about SW08sp4 removing the Colors crutch that many of us had been relying on. He took a lot of heat for that. Anyway, Mark did a Go To Meeting with me and we were able to pin down a problem with removing appearances.
I just reproduced the problem. It is a regression from 2008 and I just submitted it as SPR 454643. In RealView, it behave correctly. With realview off it regresses from correct behavior of 2008.
 
As an R bug should get immediate attention.
 
Thanks for bring it to our attention.
 
Matt, the workaround (and don’t ask me why this works) is to instead of clicking on the edit appearance icon, instead RMB on the part name in the FM and do the remove and then remove all there. Please verify that this workaround does work for you too. BTW – the reason that the face turns grey when you go into the PM for the face color is because it just removed your part color (blue) and defaulted it to the default material color – waiting for you to assign a new color to that face. Hope that makes sense.

More good news. Cross your fingers for sp1. Why does Mark have to do this? I reported this stuff to Beta support and just got arguments.

Part of the problem here is due to using old part templates. Is it my fault for using an old template or SolidWorks fault for not paying attention to existing data from long time users?

Draft Analysis?

Well, it turns out that you CAN save colors out with the new Draft Analysis, but you have to have the Face Classification option enabled, and you have to have Draft Analysis turned on when you save. I tested IGES, Parasolid and eDrawings formats, and all round tripped as expected (with draft colors).

SolidWorks might have saved themselves some unnecessary bad publicity if they had added a simple sentence about this to the What’s New. Of course that would approximately double the existing What’s New Draft Analysis entry. Sometimes that little extra effort is well spent. If functionality changes, document it for users, please.

So, this part of the story has a happy ending. Still, its unfortunate that I’ll get more bugs fixed by exposing them publicly than I will by doing beta testing. It’s also unfortunate that Mark B has to do this when support people have already seen each of these issues and rejected them. Where is Rich Welch’s 80% support satisfaction statistic when you need it?

More bugs to follow.

0 Replies to “Beta bugs follow up”

  1. Mr. Welch,

    Define a productive conversation? What has been said here has been said before for years. We know you are in the unenviable position of having to create customer satisfaction without being able to have much influence in the very thing that the customers want to be satisfied with. To the best of my knowledge you don’t write software or specifications for software. You don’t use the software. That would be the start of productive communication.

    Read the years of posts on comp.cad.solidworks. Read the posts on eng-tips. Read the posts here. Read the SW forums. Out of the many SW employees that have tried to interact with users only a few have survived in the open forums with any sort of credibility. The ones that survive do so because they scratch the itch which means they answer specific problems, not questions. When you have finished reading why don’t you ask us some questions? It just can’t be that hard and that would be more productive.

    TOP

    ****
    Bingo! perfect.

  2. Live forums offer a situation where words are less likely to be recorded, so one can get away with saying something without being held accountable for the words. It a safety manuever when someone is in a shakey PR position. You are right. He doesn’t need a podium. He needs to actually take to heart what the users are writing here and elsewhere.

    VAR support for most of the country and world is a joke. I’m lucky to have a good VAR that I do put to use. I know this is not the normal for most of the planet. Even as my VAR grows, their services have become more strained.

    Rich, it is time to listen to the users, not to preach religious-like company propogada. This isn’t Fox News Talking Head show where one side gets supported regardless to reality. This is reality. These are real people telling you their experiences and opinions. These people pay your wage. You should be listening, and not looking for a Fox News-like forum to try to bash the company line into the minds of hapless watchers. We are your sponsors, and no one else. Time to start listening to your sponsors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.