I'm going to try it out....
My login shows that it is only for Early Visibility (beta SP2.0). Do you have something the rest of us don't or am I the only one? Steve Tietz
The save as .pdf seems to be screwed. I get "An unknown error occurred during the creation of the PDF file." on every drawing I try it on. Worked fine this morning on SP1. =---
Actually, after using it, it works ok but.. it toggles itself off during edits or rebuilds so, it becomes useless or the user has too remember to turn it back on before a save. BTW, you may have noticed that it is also becomes a option in SW2003 sp5? It also toggles itself off during edits/rebuilds. And, if anyone is thinking that because SW2003 now has this option it is somehow turning off the SW2004 option, that isn't the case because I can work in "only" SW2004 all day and notice the SW2004 tessellation option toggles off. ...
a CRTL Q here with sp1 made the split line partially vanish but the loft was ok found the split line definition was missing faces which I restored ok otherwise seems fine
Mike, When I open the file, the surface loft is one single face. CTRL-Q turns it into multiple faces(??). Then the split line vanishes. Of course, what I know about surfaces could fit in the shell of a mollusk, so I don't know if I've helped or not. SP1 Richard
Yeah, this is NOT good, this is bad! After the ctrl-q, the loft segments or isoparms show and the splitline of course only splits one of the segmented faces. Annual $ub$cription = inconsistency = job security = next release promises!? Oh boy, so much fun,.. Thanks for showing this. ...
Mike, Nah, well, if you made this file in one of the beta's (you have a last saved date of Nov 7?),.. maybe...? Otherwise, I understand your concern, and I would reinstall myself,.. but there should be no reason for you to do this because of this file? If this file was made in a released version, then, this is a SW Corp problem,.. and now it becomes all our problem and all of our time and money is being wasted again,.. no? May I ask, why do the users always think it is "their fault"? Var - user error psychology? ...
Hmm, I guess it depends on what type of mollusk or shell (the largest reported clam is 700lbs and about 4 feet long, the average human brain weighs ~3lbs) ? i.e., mollusk types originate from or reside in some from of shell and there are 7 classes (50,000 and 200,000 mollusk species).. so, my point is, it's a open question then?... How much surface information can be stored in a space? http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/invertebrates/mollusk/Printouts.shtml http://molluskmania.virtualave.net/ Anyhow, depending on the mollusk, the fun or challenge in modeling them is quite interesting... ...
Good analogy. Maybe our nurses aren't always clueless but they sure as hell try hard to convince us we're not bleeding to death. Sometimes I feel like the group is divided too... some of the users convinced that every problem is a user error and / or the only solutions worth pursuing are changes in the way we work. Other users recognize problems with the software and want to vent, like me, aren't exactly welcomed. I don't come here to feel better about paying for Solidworks or recommending it to my boss, and I'm damn tired of the insulation factor that you summed up so well. Question is, what can we do about it. The beta program isn't helping like it should. The software gets released whether it's ready or not, and whether we say it is, or not. Early on I participated a lot in beta's for lots of different software, including Microsoft and Autodesk products, but now I don't even consider it worth my time. - Eddy =---
Hey Mike, How did you create this model ??? Sure you didn't do it in 2003 and bring it forward ?? I brought it into 2004 SP0 and it segments the loft along the guide curves with a control-Q. I deleted the loft, and then recreated it using your sketches, and it segmented in four places !!! I was able to get it down to a single left-right segmentation only after turning on maintain tangency, and advanced smoothing. (which you had "off" in the original) Also, I was unable to select "sketch 5" from the graphics window. It would let me select "sketch 3", then when I selected five it would turn three off. I had to select it from the tree. Man-O-man, what a bugfest. I feel sorry for you if you have to get any real work done with this pig. We won't be using it for quite a while yet. Regards Mark =---
There is definitely a contingent on this ng that thinks it is cool to just act angry and criticize. People expect that from you when you're 14. If that's your thing, then I guess no one is going to persuade you that its imbecillic. Some folks say that they have a "right" to bitch endlessly. I don't think that's the case, although no one can stop you from doing it. Well, I've also got a "right" to call your idiocy what it really is - idiocy. Criticizing software with so many shortcomings is too easy, its kind of disgraceful, like beating up your little sister. We all know there are tons of bugs in the software. What gets me is when somebody actually finds a bug and actually gets a spr for it, they act like "a bug!! a bug!! a bug!!" I have literally hundreds of sprs, and get 4-5 new ones a week. It's not a big deal to find a bug. You claim to just be "venting" as if that makes it ok, but "venting" usually relieves pressure, and these posts seem to feed off of one another and whip themselves into a spiralling frenzy. To me what is far more interesting and meaningful is how do you work with flawed tools to get done what you need to do? Its not news that tools are flawed. Youre no hero for crying about how other people are preventing you from doing your job. No one is going to pay you for the ability to whine like a liberal activist/professional victim. The only thing that counts is your ability to get your engineering or design job done with flawed tools. If you do a good job at that, you will be rewarded and taken seriously. If you cant make SolidWorks work to get your job done, there is something seriously wrong, and its your fault. You have selected the wrong tool. Theatrical whining to create a sensation in a public place won't help you, and it won't make the tools better or people at SolidWorks listen to you. You'd better put it back in the box and send it back because youre too stupid to use it. If you really want to improve the tools, the best way to do it is to track down the bugs and interface inconsistancies and send them in to SW or your VAR. But dont do it with that whine you use here, people tend to tune out whiners because its unpleasant to listen to. (This post of yours has gained you status on my news readers "ignore" list because of your insistance on having nothing of value to say). Oh, very dramatic. If you are bleeding, it is a self inflicted wound. No one has forced you to use this software. You said you recommended it to your boss? Whose fault is it that you are stuck using such sh_tty software? Why do you continue to use it if it is as bad as you say and the employees are involved in some conspiracy to defraud customers as Wilson implies? Quite honestly, many people who post here don't know the software as well as they think they do. The first sign of a problem with the software, and they blame SolidWorks, when it is very likely that they just don't know the correct setting, haven't done training or looked at the help file. Your ignorance is not Solidworks fault. Also, if you are trying to get a job done and run into a bug, what are you going to do? Whine here, and hope that SW hears you whining and wait a few weeks until they fix the software so you can start working again? No, that's not gonna happen. If you are going to finish what you have to do, you're going to have to find a new way to get there to get around the bug. I try to learn as many ways of doing things as I can, because chances are that I'm gonna need that workaround because of some bug or something that just doesn't work well in SW. So, yes, as inconvenient as it is, it is the only practical thing to be able to change the way you work. You are speculating about something that you have no idea about. The other poster is saying what he said just for dramatic effect. He used to work at a VAR and knows full well that SolidWorks employees regularly get an earful from users. SolidWorks knows the problems with the software, and they have to sort through the ridiculous emotional crap like what you and a handful of other folks post. Here's a quote from Jon Hirschtick, former CEO of SolidWorks responding to criticism about the quality of the software: "We suck less". They know. If you don't like it, no one is so fond of you that we won't let you move to another software (and newsgroup). Oh, I didn't know you were such an expert. How "should" it work? How do you know it's not working? What's not working about it? How do you get your inside information? Explain how you arrived at this decision. Explain what makes you more qualified to make this judgment than the people at SW? Armadillo Hunter
hmm... this reads like a VAR bend over and take it speech? ... thank you sir may I have another... Anyhow, from my perspective, balance/rewards are not in my favor what so ever. A simple timecard reporting time expended or lost time applied towards bug reports, regressions, feature failures and feature enhancements is not a win/win for the user. unless you are a employee who gets paid regardless of the problems? Lets not kid ourselves, user participation is generally a win/win for SW Corp and their VARS, not the user. ...
pardon me for saying this Imadildo Hunter, but if we all add you to our blocked senders list we wont be achieving much will we, because you really haven't posted anything -good,bad or indifferent. Why attack someone's views if all you do is spectate and covertly get benefit from other users knowledge? now the quality isn't good enough for you?!.... I'm looking forward to reading a stream of finely crafted and helpful posts from you in the new year demonstrating a superior understanding of SW (with explanations of how you know these things to be true and your qualifications of course). cheers
