SolidSmack - Latest Comments in 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

ryan — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:43:19 -0000

I think Solidworks is a turd of the smelliest magnitude. I hate it, despise it, loath it, I fart in it's general direction! If I had a say at my company, I'd tell SW to stuff their buggy POS program up their collective ars! I just needed to vent and this website came up when I googled "Solidworks Sucks". Thanks for listening.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

NathonRose — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:12:39 -0000

The splash screen was "transparent" for a while in the beta. For some reason I liked that. Whoever did it should be mad that they took away their programming!

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

jonnie — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 08:35:08 -0000

Another point to Nima

"3. In 2008 it will take at least double if not triple the time to save the exact same model and the file takes up more space. WHY?!!! This could only mean they are putting more information in a saved file. And last time I checked this is the wrong direction in software improvement"

Nima, the performance of modern CADCAM software is truely amazing, I spent thirteen years in the industry and parts that now fly at speed would have taken weeks with the algorithms of yesterday.

Performance and reliability are key issues, filesize is generally considered secondary since memory and disk space capacity and prices are cheap whereas end user design time is not.

Car and Aircraft manufactures demand ever increasing performance as each year part size and complexities increase as designers create ever more detailed and complex shapes - increases in hardware speed help but there is considerable pressure on the developer to increase performance in the software as well.

If you want higher performance you generally have to consider storing more derived data, this is extremely troublesome for reasons hinted at in the last reply I made to your post but thats another story. If capacity is cheap then developers may use it in order to please customers on some other aspect such as performance.

I cant say why 2008 files are larger than 2007 but please do reconsider making deductivce criticisms like this because they are very unlikely to have any kind of technical validity - you are simply guessing.

It remains my opinion that solid modelling is probably one of the most complex areas of software to date, I know of nothing more complex than the industry reality of an essentially analogue data set (geometry) subject to three dimensional algorithms compounded with the mindboggling complexity of software version and algorithm changes with the expectation that parts from an earlier version should still rebuild in a later version when the algorithm changes involved reflect improvements and bug fixes.

The fact that the team at SW manage to shield you...the end user...from all this complexity is testament to their sheer skill and dedication - similar comments apply to other developers working in the field.

Since I am no longer working in the industry I cannot say why your part takes longer to save - true it may be a bug but they may also be doing something smart to improve some aspect that you are not taking into account.

If I cant guess with my background then I doubt you can.

Why dont you stop guessing on online forums and instead help SW by submitting a bug report - that way someone will be able to do something about it ( if indeed there is a problem at all ) - conjecture on internals is very easy to write but in an area as technical as solid modelling it is very unlikely to have any value at all - I spent years fixing bugs just like this one. I would also add that such "reports" were often found to be part specific - testing schedules would usually catch any kind of general degradation that could otherwise be avoided.

For what is worth, Solidworks had a very aggressive stance on bugs, quality issues and performance whilst I was working in the industry - individual accounts may vary but the big picture is that they made quality, performance and reliability very high profile and they do not deserve the characterisation you put forwards here.

Disclaimer - I have no remaining connections to the CADCAM industry other than friends I have kept in touch with. I have no reason to defend anyone at Solidworks other than my memories of working in collaboration with an exceedingly clever and dedicated team who worked very hard to make solid modelling appear easy and intuitive to the end user when the internal reality is anything but simple. In a way it is probably testament to their skill that quite a few contributors to these forums seem to think that solid modelling software is as simple as the other applications sitting on their machines when infact it is a magnitude more complex that most software that your average private person or small company will ever buy.

Jon

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

jonnie — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 07:16:23 -0000

Nima,

I used to be a Parasolid developer ( now gone on to other things ) I worked on core geometry and modelling algorithms - I know things from the inside out.

Quote: "If you open a file in 2008 and save it, you will never be able to open it with 2007. (And you can't save as 'solidworks 2007 file') This is shameful, even Microsoft with all its power and customer bullying provides compatibility with at least one generation of older software made by them"

This is naive on your part - it seems you know little of the sheer complexity involved.

Backwards compatibility (ie port a 2008 part into 2007 software - for example) in three dimensional geometry, maths and derived data is horrendously complex - the part file is not just a snapshot of geometry and topology, it also represents decisions and derived data from mathematical algorithms that have improved from one version to the next - its not even that black and white - every improvement will cause one or two casualties - effectively solid modelling in its purest form is analogue computation but real numbers cannot be represented on digital machines and so they are represented by finite precision floating points - in theory software that is by its nature fundamentally digital - like a graphics package that deals in pixels - can be bug free but bspline surfaces and the like are defined by real numbers - and unfortunately only approximated by floating point numbers - this is a hint at just one of a myriad of huge technical problems that very smart and talented people have wrestled with to deliver what are actually rather incredible standards of reliability given the incredibly difficult problem being solved in free form solid modelling.

By means of example - if an interersection curve between two bspline surfaces (would be)miscalculated in 2007 and properly calculated in 2008 version software, the difference may have been minor and you as the user may have accepted or even been aware of the difference. This difference may mean that in 2007 software your 2008 part is not viable. In order to properly understand software as complex as CADCAM you have to think in terms of timelines where bugs, false turns and other such problems mean that simple minded forward or backward winding of the timeline in terms of parts or software version (as you demand) is extremely complex - I spent something like thirteen years fixing problems of huge complexity for bugs that relate to this topic. Your choice of Microsoft OS products for a counter example is not a good one - you compare such different beasts - there is little mathematical complexity in OS systems, the complexity is due to the scale of the software - solid modelling code is fundamentally complex even on the scale of just a few hundred lines of code - whatever problems those guys at MS face with forwards or backwards compatiablity I can assure you they will be totally different from those at SW and the fact that you quote this shows you have little grasp of the issues or technical complexities - as an end user that is fine you arent supposed to understand the problems so I am not criticising you but hoping to correct you a little.

Forwards compatibility is a major headache - its difficult enough to get all parts that rebuild fine in version X to rebuild ok in version X+1 but the reverse will in general be even more difficult.

By the way - NX is also built on Parasolid so my comments apply there.

I am puzzled by your hint that NX might resolve this issue, at the time I left Parasolid four years ago then Parasolid itself would not import a Parasolid part file made in version X+1 into version X this was deliberate - both SW and NX depend on embedded Parasolid part files although "you" the user doesnt usually see this since the Parasolid data is wrapped up inside their respective native file formats.

Maybe since I left the industry NX has provided some kind of ability to port parts back to earlier versions - your post seems to suggest this - but I can assure you that the underlying complexities are there in the maths and the algorithms and whatever the documentation says it will in general be difficult to reliably take complex models created in newer versions of software back to older ones.

Generally newer code should cope with product (part files) of older code since the new code is expected to match the capability of the old code (and then some) - however the reverse is generally not true and with good reason! It is not possible to port many of the major improvements because of data structure changes, algorithm changes, whole areas of code re-design and changes to the way data is archived (additional fields in a surface node for instance). Solid modelling code is like a tree of dependencies, when you port one change you end up having to port another and then another and so on - it snowballs and pretty quick you find that in order to reliably support all models made in X+1 in version X you pretty much have to make version X into version X+1 which completely defeats the object of having version code.

Jon

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

joshmings — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:35:39 -0000

It all seems like a lot of this could be solved with either product designed to work a on single set of hardware or by having a support system that helps companies set things up. market politics is messy for sure, but definitely doesn't mean there should be such disparate prices in similar markets. I could see lower prices in developing countries, but that's a whole other story. Thanks for the comment Barry.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Barry — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:29:00 -0000

We have been using SW since 1999 and have always found that with each new version they take 2 steps forward and 10 backward. The crashes have always occurred but are now worse than ever. Each time we upgrade we have found that the new version requires a new computer and a higher level graphics card. We currrently run the top level system recommended by SW and still it crashes.
Also the pricing is nothing but extreme highway robbery. Jesse James, Ronald Biggs and Ned Kelly were all thorough gentlemen compared to SW.
Here in Australia we are forced to py more than double what they pay in the USA.
Many SW users I know have 1 or 2 licences and then purchase additional licences from the internet at significantly lower prices as the local distributor will not give decent pricing until you have at least 50 seats.
I have also seen SW 2008 on sale in Indonesia and other parts of Asia for only a few dollars. I know at least 2 users that purchased the cheap SW2008 and it works as well as the SW supplied versions.
About the best facility they ever offered was the home licence version.This was marketed as a major feature in Australia but they were very reluctant to tell anyone that when you upgrade to SW2009 you will automatically loose the feature. This absouletly SUCKS and is in blatent conflict with Australian fair trading laws but they don't care they just keep taking your money and giving you less.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Tim — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:13:46 -0000

One more thing....

If you try to make a configuration of a part with a folder in it, everything in the folder will go to shit and get all messed up........................

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Tim — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:48:15 -0000

Yeah, I've got a few... Solid works 2008 sucks my ass.. What is this new "Failed to Save" crap where you can't even do a Save As.., you're just up the creek? And how come none of the options check boxes actually do what they say they they do? And why is Solidworks "not designed to run over a network" (direct quote from SW support) And what good is the so-called "Feature Expert"?
And what's this new feature where the parts double in size every time you save them, no matter what... I could go on and on...
Sorry guys, just needed to vent a bit... back to work...

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

joshmings — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:42:49 -0000

Jamb, hey there, it sounds like a network connection problem. In particular one that is common with opening files over a wireless network. I would try to get on a hardline, or check you router to see if it's loosing connections. It may be a simple as getting a new router. THe only other thing it could be is that your drives are not mapping correctly. I'm not sure if you have a script that you IT department has set up to automate that or if it's one you have to map manually. You may check this with them. Thanks for the comment!

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

jamb — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:20:15 -0000

What about Solidworks 2008 fail to open file with one double-click, but the second double-click will succeed (it doesn't matter even if you choose different file). A window message will throw

Windows cannot find '\\server\...\filename.SLDRPT'. Make sure you typed the name correctly, ...etc

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Gabi — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:43:23 -0000

I have started working in CAD programs about 6 years ago. Started in AutoCAD, the moved to Inventor, next came Solidworks, had a little adventure in Kobotek KeyCreator and Pro E and then arrived to CATIA.
I know how to work very well in all the first three and in the last one.
Now I've got the NX 5 and also the new NX 6 but I haven't tried much in it. Though it's easy.
I hate that Dassault Systemes are running the 100 m with the SW 2008 and SW 2009. And I hate that in a company the last guy to be asked what software to use for CAD is the one man that actually uses it.
I'm tired of all the crashes, in every software and tired of the constant upgrading I have to make to my PC.
But, you know what, it's not worth fighting for.
Instead, I would like to ask any of you, if you have some modeling to do, I offer my help.
Just send sketches, drawings, scans, you need making.
I am asking no money for it.
Of course, you should send only thing that are not very urgent. Beacuse I'll work on my free time. About 4 hours a day.
Thanks and good luck to you all.

PS: If someone can help. I want to learn FEA. Please send documentation if you have any!

e-mail:hack3ru@gmail.com

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Fred Fulmer — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:48:46 -0000

I used Pro-E and Autocad before there was a Windows operating system. Ran Pro-E on a UNIX operating system and I agree SolidWorks has me looking for another software. They have changed this software from an engineering tool to a marketing toy.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

sandy — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 02:51:31 -0000

I just installed Solid works 2008. I was looking for a Drop test study but don't know how to load Drop test study. Only Static study is featuring in the Cosmos works. Please Help...........

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Shopping Sp Market — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:33:32 -0000

Are people still going to use this, its virtually obsolete now isnt it ?

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Cheap Windows Hosting Reseller — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:03:57 -0000

Good site I \"Stumbledupon\" it today and gave it a stumble for you.. looking forward to seeing what else you have..later

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

John Andrew Metza — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:48:34 -0000

SW2008 was not ready for release. It shows the arrogance of the company that they think they can release something once a year with that many changes. It is typical of the president and his mega ego. Even companies as large as Microsoft with a thousand times the staff of SW don't work off fixed release dates. My company crashed hourly with SW 2008 for six months. Some parts crashed the interface as soon as they were booted up. I don't even want to talk about the fact you can't save in an earlier version, that just makes me want to personally throttle the the presisdent of SW. More arrogance. "We know what you need" "We know what is best for you" "We will tell you what you can and can't do" A real control freak to the core. The opposite of open source and everything that makes software a pleasure to work with. Then the support people always start with blaming you for SW problems. Their favorite line is, "Other customers aren't experiencing these problems." By starting off blaming the customer, it really comes off as arrogant. It is the thread the runs through why I am so pissed with this application and the people who support it. First deny there are any problems. "Everybody loves "Other users don't have these issues" What kind of statement is that? That shows almost no knowledge of applications or how software works. It is totally stupid thing to say with no practical value for the customer with the problem and factually means nothing. The only possible result of the statement is to piss off the customer or make them feel like an idiot.

Then the blame goes on. "You must have installed it incorrectly", or "your virus software (that we don't run) is to blame" Or "your video card hasn't been tested". What has that got to do with anything in practical sense? I could be running the best SW video card ever made and the fact that it hasn't been tested makes it crash the software? What will the technician do, test it for me on the phone? What is the point of such a statement to finding the cause of the problem? What is he going to do? Give up the troubleshooting process because my card hasn't been tested?

We recently went through all the hoops they could think of to find out why our software was crashing the instant we clicked on an annotation. Couldn't even delete the thing because deleting it requires you to CLICK ON THE FRICKING THING!!! In the end they found a bug in the code. The fix was SP4. So here we are in June and finally the software might be ready to released. They kept their revenue streaming going though, that was the real point to begin with right?

We contract with a designer that has every CAD package known to man running on his server. He is an old timer with tremendous knowlege and a real pleasure to work with. He has to be able to handle anything that comes his way, so needs everything. His favorite is CADKEY. He freely admits it won't do everything, but says it is easier to build your stuff in CADKEY then import it to SW to do annimations, etc. That is a sad commentary on SW, isn't it?

Has anyone besides me noticed there are no keyboard equivilents next to the commands? Talk about a bunch of lazy developers. A good GUI has multiple ways of doing things and it is easy to see the keyboard equivalent to any commmand next to the menu item. SW didn't bother. They took away the "EDIT SKETCH" text, I guess that was too helpful and would've been a great place to put the keyboard equivalent, and put an icon in another area. It took me five minutes to find out how to edit a sketch. Multilpy that by all my guys, all the commands they changed and it ads up to a lot of wasted time and money. They could care less though. They sold another round of support licenses. It is the attitude that really sticks in my craw.

jam

And only when your backs are against the wall admit SW2008 has bugs. All software has bugs, it is a mathematical impossibility to fully debug an application when the complexity reaches a certain level. There are whole books written on the subject. SW has the artificial deadline every year to come out with wiz bang new package to keep the revenue flowing. Even giants like Microsoft slip their deadlines for practical reasons. Only sheer arrogance ships something when it isn't ready. 2008 out of the box was not ready for release. 6 months we crashed over here every single time we opened our design. The box says I have 90 day warranty or I get a refund. How about a refund for the 6 months we couldn't use it?

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

CT Green — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:27:55 -0000

I've been having crashing issues too. When SW begins to act strange, such as suddenly failing to highlight edges, a crash is inevitable. It's time to save, close and re-start. Sometimes re-booting my Dell Precision workstation is required. And, it sounds like this may be an XP vs. Vista issue. I would convert to 64 bit Vista, but our IT people won't support it. Perhaps they will be willing to install the 32 bit version? Have passionately loved earlier versions of SW. And, it would be worth the effort of installing a new OS to regain speed and stability.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Larry — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:00:47 -0000

Been using Solidworks since it first came out. In the last 5 years have used it with Moldworks and agree with CT. Have been having the crashing issues as well but yes give me fast and functional and incremental change instead of a complete revamp. Ive completely reformated my hard drive and removed everything and it crashes so often I dont have time to do anything else but reboot and reload and am forced to constantly save large assemblies. Have looked at other software and am very tempted but there is the large price tag and of course learning all over again. Have called tech support and they never find anything.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Daniel — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:15:26 -0000

I read similar article also named utely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008 They Didn't Tell You. | SolidSmack - SolidWorks 3D CAD Technology Design Blog, and it was completely different. Personally, I agree with you more, because this article makes a little bit more sense for me

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

nwdesigner — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:20:18 -0000

i'll second CT Green!!!

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

CT Green — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:54:27 -0000

SW2008 Reminds me of the old Minolta Coroporation that was "Marketing Driven." They went "marketing crazy" and started adding every conceiveable bell and whistle to all their cameras. What they really needed was a simple auto-focus system that really worked. Canon was the first camera company to do that when they released the "Elan." It was the first camera in the world that could focus on both vertical and horizontal lines. And, it was lightning fast. And, Canon conquered the marketplace with it, even eclipsing Nikon. Right now they own over 90% of the photo-journalism market. Minolta, on the other hand, was sued for stealing some of those "bells and whistles" and went broke. Sony bought them, and they're now trying to recover market share. Solidworks seems to have become a "Marketing Driven" comapany ever since they were purchased by Dassault. And, it's not a good thing. I want a CAD package that's lightning fast and has lightning fast menus. And, I don't want them to change everything with each new major release. That drives all of us crazy. How about icons that are easier to see, find and identify, rather than change them to look like the new Vista OS? Have they done studies on that? Have they done regular studies on how to make menus faster and more efficient? If so, they're keeping it a secret. I want lightning fast software. Instead we're getting new bells and whistles that most of us don't want and didn't ask for. And that, my friends is evidence SolidWorks has become a dysfunctional "Marketing Driven" company. They're leadership probably never understood why we all moved to SolidWorks in the first place. Dilbert's boss is alive and well and working at SolidWorks.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

nwdesigner — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:22:12 -0000

SW 2008 is like a cat that won't take a shit. It's got all the cute fuzziness, except that when you need it to be a good friend and do its duty - it doesn't. How about instead of releasing a very pricey piece of cat poop (ie. sp 1, sp 2, sp 2.2, sp 3,....), make sure you are selling a great product! I really don't need to spend a full day installing updates that remind me of why i hate microsoft, and apparently now itunes as well. So, SW engineers, marketeers, and everyone else who is responsible for this powerful cat poop - get your act together. I know i speak for a lot of industrial designers who use this software to create solutions for problems, but i don't see how I'm going to solve this problem without shooting the cat that won't shit.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

CT Green — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 11:50:49 -0000

I work for a very large corporation with facillities all over the world. Yesterday a colleague ask for SW part files we will be making overseas. And, he found he can't open them because he has SW2007 and I have SW2008. He then asked me to save them in SW2007 and resend them. Ha, ha, like that were possible. His division hasn't upgraded yet because so many of us are having problems with 2008. And, this situation is not acceptable to us at all. Does anyone know if Solid Edge or Inventor allows saving in older file formats? One other thing, SW2008 is a resource hog that's driven my Dell Workstation to it's knees. Have been uninstalling all unessential progs and it hasn't helped one bit. Remember the days when you could run SolidWorks on a Pentium 1 computer? Those days are gone. It's ironic as we've been moving away from ProE to SolidWorks. And, SolidWorks is now aquiring the same bad traits that compelled us to dump ProE. Hey, I loved earlier versions of SW. But, I passionately hate the 2008 that's infesting my computer. Somebody shoot me.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Josh — Mon, 19 May 2008 10:32:25 -0000

Hey Pedro. Thanks for the comment. I think the result of using SW08 are going to be somewhat subjective. We're not using it in production except what I'm testing out daily, but it has usability that will increase our designers efficiency. The Shortcut bar for one allows in fewer operations while staying in the workspace. the dynamic search has saved time as well although it need to be faster in large assemblies. My suggestion to many that are skeptical of the changes is to go with 2009. beta starts in June and thatwill allow you to try it out and see for yourself, but I already know of some performance enhancements that will help.

Re: 8 Absolutely Odd Facts About SolidWorks 2008

Josh — Mon, 19 May 2008 10:24:52 -0000

Hey Thomas, glad things worked out for you. There's a disconnect between hardware/software tech. One is always driving the other prematurely. I would have to concur with the upgrade cost. I've suggested in the past to wait until your companies next round of hardware upgrades. We are still not using it in production for multiple reason, but I want to make sure the hardware will handle the move to 08/09 and Vista which will coincide with each other.