Can you implement SolidWorks 2009 sp0?

Well, SolidWorks has shipped it, so they must be feeling pretty good about it. They branded it sp0 and out it goes. I spent a fair amount of time using Beta software, and reported bugs. What I’m interested in is if these bugs got fixed in the shipping software. SolidWorks ran a beta contest so that users could find bugs. I can’t go through all of the bugs in one post, so I’ll hit my favorites, and then post some more later. If you have bugs that you reported in beta and they still got shipped with sp0, leave a comment. I’d love to hear from Shaodun Lin. I’ll bet he has an impressive list of shipped beta bugs.

Add Dimensions

The first one I want to look at has to do with some otherwise fantastic new functionality. The ability to add dimensions to sketch entities while you are sketching. If this one works, it will save me a lot of time. Let’s take a look.

The Circle PropertyManager enables you to select either a center point circle or a three point circle. The new options are Add Dimenions and Diameter Dimensions. Add Dimensions is the one that obviously adds a dimension to your circle when you draw it.

Radius or Diameter?

The Diameter Dimensions option is maybe a little misleading. Add Dimensions does not add multiple dimensions, but only one. By default it adds a radius value, and if you use the Diameter Dimensions option, it will put a diameter  on a circle. There is no functionality to add linear dimensions to the center point of the circle, but both dimension settings are plural.

This is talking about a full circle. And it puts a radius value on by default. I asked a SW person about this and was told this is working as designed because this is the behavior that users told them they wanted. Interesting. I wonder who puts radius values on full circles? There may be niche applications where people do this, but standard mechanical design practice is for diameter dimensions on full circles and radius values on arcs. Even the rest of SolidWorks software works that way, why should the new functionality be different? Is this right or wrong?

Click Click or Click Drag?

One of the strengths of SolidWorks in my mind has always been that they allowed you to do things your way. Preselect – post select. Click-click sketching or Click-drag. In order to use the Add Dimensions functionality, you have to have the Tools, Options, Sketch setting called Enable On Screen Numeric Input On Entity Creation turned on. The bad thing is that it only works if you use click-click sketching.

The other bad thing is that it has a special mode of function, it doesn’t work with the Tools, Options, General Input Dimension Value setting. So one setting overrides the other. Why can’t they both work at the same time? Why does SW now start giving precedence to the AutoCAD way of sketching? Why do I have to change the way I work to accommodate the software rather than the other way around?

Colors

The colors functions went through some traumatic changes in SW2008, and then beta testers forced some more changes in 2009. I feel pretty good about the changes except that they broke something that had been broken from the beginning until it was fixed in 2007, and is now broken again.

I get really frustrated when “progress” means that we have to take a step back in terms of real usability. If you change a face color in what I guess has to now be called the “old fashioned way”, by clicking the face, clicking the appearance icon, clicking the face option, then clicking the color from the pallette (not too bad, only 1 or 2 clicks more than 2007), there is no way to remove that color using any equivalent of the Remove All Colors function that worked in 2007.

Further, I think the whole Remove Appearance functionality is still messed up. If I start a part from a template and Remove Appearances, the part turns gray. I don’t understand. I think the whole thing is not figured out. SolidWorks people design the software using an entire set of assumptions that are simply not valid all of the time.

Draft Analysis

Another potentially great new functionality is the change to the Draft Analysis. You can turn it on, and the colors update as you work! How great is that?!? The only problem is that you can’t save the colors like you could in previous versions, so you can’t send a molder a model colored for the draft as an IGES or eDrawing. This is why you have to consider existing functionality when you “improve” something. In this case I’m simply screwed. There really isn’t an option other than manually coloring faces.

So can you?

So can I implement SolidWorks 2009 sp0? Well, I’m just one guy. I’m a contractor. I do work for other people. I still have projects in 2007. I get rare projects in 2008, and I’ve already done several projects in 2009. Some people might argue that the things I’ve listed here aren’t bugs, but I think they are. They are functionality that used to work, but no longer works. They are conceptual bugs, because functionality I used has been designed right out of the software without a reasonable replacement. When I have the choice I use 2009, because I can’t use 2008, and 2009 really in most respects is better than 2007. I guess I just keep hoping that they will do what they say they will do.

For some people the question of implementing a new version hinges on specific functionality. I want to keep examining 2009 beta bugs that got shipped. Send yours in. Let’s hold their feet to the fire on this. I want to know why I wasted so much time finding bugs in beta if they are just going to ship them in the released product.

 

0 Replies to “Can you implement SolidWorks 2009 sp0?”

  1. Matt,

    I think we were in the same meeting with him a few years back. I got on his least favorite person list I do believe. Over the years I’ve paid over $15,000 into SW for subscription. Boy it adds up and what do I have for it? A shelf full of boxes that don’t connect to each other and a customer satisfaction VP that needs English lessons. I could have bought a new car or UG on time payments.

    He is asking for specific questions. We would do well to regard this statement, “The spirit giveth life, but the law kills.” SW will address and resolve each question to their satisfaction (including an assessment of the questioner’s credibility). Funny thing is that the questioner will have no say in whether their question was really answered.

    As one of the Three Amigos I saw SW address some of the easier issues presented to them but not the big issues. Somehow the big issues slipped through the cracks because performance is such a hard thing to measure.

    TOP

    ****
    Paul,
    Yes, I do remember you there, and I think you’re right about his least favorite person list.

    You’re also right about the divide and conquer tactic. That’s why I want to do this independent of SolidWorks. If I let them get involved, they will try to usurp and squash. In the end we will present some well considered ideas as options. If they openly ignore users, they will pay a price.

    I think their tactic will be to say “I’ll get back to you on that, things can’t change over night” and hope it gets forgotten. Just the same that happened with the documentation initiative.

    I was always skeptical of the amigos thing, and this is in the same category, except no one’s getting on a plane. I think this has about the same chances as the amigos trip to succeed, which is very little. Still, we’ve got enough momentum on this that SW can’t ignore it.

    Reply

  2. Mr. Rich Welch,

    Let the response of the users here be VERY clear. We are paying customers. We support SolidWorks because it has supported our businesses, made us more efficient and provided us with competitive advantages we would not have had if we stayed in a 2D realm. We have an investment in SolidWorks that would not be easy to back away from. We even recommend SolidWorks to YOUR prospective customers because we like the product(s).

    As paying customers, however, we have a choice as to where we spend our money on tools. We also make decisions to change our investments when something ‘bigger-better-faster-more’ comes along, especially if that includes ‘for less’. Finally, our loyal support of your product is greatly affected by the quality of the products and service you provide.

    While I think I understand SolidWorks’ need to make these subscription policies clear, quite frankly it is not our problem that you, or VARs, allow support to continue for “a very small handful of customers who let their subscription support lapse, but continue to take advantage of the benefits of paid support for weeks, months, or even years before renewing their service.” Many of us will never be affected by this policy as we’ll continue to pay maintenance! But, plain and simple, this policy stinks and shoving it in the faces of paying customers is not winning you supporters. What happened to the ‘voice of the customer’ that Mr. Jeff Ray so proudly spoke of at the SolidWorks World conferences in Orlando (’05) and Las Vegas (’06)? Apparently you are no longer listening.

    Reply

  4. This is sad. A VP for a company that has product marketing edge, just flushing it down the tubes because of his arrogance. What are we users, who make our living with this product, to do?

    As a contractor who pays for this product out of his own pocket, I can’t deal with a company who will not listen to reason and take my needs seriously. I, for one, will not be renewing my subscription. Because of SW’s market share, however, I will have to continue as a user until the market begins to see the light and begins migrating to the competition. In my business, it’s still more about design knowledge and capabilities rather than the ‘tools’ you use. You simply have to be able to adapt to them all.

    Hey Rich! How does it feel, knowing you are scuttling your own ship?

    Reply

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.