Is there anyway to open and edit 2007 files using 2006

I have upgraded to 2007 but on a second machine have 2006 installed. Is
there any way to open and edit files created in 2007 with 2006. It keeps
giving me future version problems.

 

Bad news dude...

restore your 2006 files from those eternal backups that you might have!

Once you take the leap of faith, there is no return.....

 

Man I wish I could charge $1.00 for every one that asks this question. I
wouldn't have to work the rest of my life. Not only is it not possible
it probably never will be. SW needs to put a big red banner when it
installs a new version that any file saved in this version will not be
able to be opened in any older version. People have to remember that SW
is not or ever will be Autocad. If you look at any other parametric
modeler, this is not possible in those either. Once you've saved in new
version, old version wont open them.

 

If you are really desperate you could try saving the file in STEP,
IGES®, SAT (ACIS®), VDA-FS, or Parasolid® format - then use
featureworks to restore "some" intelligence to the dumb solid

Kev

 

The only way this will ever be possible with any parametric cad package
is if they
only make improvements to the gui interface, code optimaizations for
speed, bug fixes,
and just general interface improvements. Any time they add a new
feature or geometry
creation functionality the file will automatically not be backwards
compatible. This is because
the old version will not reconize this new math/data for this
underlying feature process.

To some, this may not be a bad idea for a a version or two. I
however, welcome improvements
to feature creation and new functionality in general.

Don

 

Sorry, no cigar. And yet this should be possible.

 

Any new innovation (like electricity !) was 'Not possible' before it
was done !!

The CUSTOMER / USER benefits of solidworks doing a 'save as' to an
earlier are many...
1. Being able to work with all the clients/colleauges - who are on
different versions of solidworks
2. If an new version is buggy (when is it not ?) then mission critial
jobs can still get done on earlier versions.
3. Avoids the massive, one way, upheaval of moving up to next
release.... and having to co-ordinate this with other companies who
might share data.

Even if just the new features were dumb it would be Ok (new features
are a very small % of new files). OK it would give solidwork coders
some work, but NOT impossible. - There are also commercial forces in
action here - of course solidworks would like us to comply with THEIR
utopia of everybody upgrading to sp0 when it comes out, and as well as
paying maintenance - and all being their beta testers.... just like
THEIR utopia of everyone using solidworks !.
Back in the real world, where real users work, there many cad systems
(pro-e tho inventor etc.), many versions of solidworks, (I have
colleauges who for various commercial reasons, work on swks 2004, 2005,
2006 & 2007)... .........AND is 2007 sp0 sp1 bug free ?? - good
enough to use on mission critial jobs ... ??? (This question seems to
be behind many discussions posted here).

 

Yep,
I've currently working for clients who are using SWX '04, '05, '06 & 07
It would be great if I could just have the latest version loaded and
"save As" the older versions instead of hving all 4 versions loaded on
my PC.

Kev

 

Prior to Pro/E v18 or v19 (somewhere in there) it was possible to do
backward compatibility with Pro/E by simply editing the part file (it
was man readable). It can be done. Ever wonder why SW installable keeps
getting bigger? Because SW will use the "old" way of generating
geometry until a feature is recreated in the new version. So it would
seem that one could pick an option in SW like "Work in 2006 or 2004"
during a modeling session and SW would then generate a part in that
version when saved. My guess is that this would be hardest to do in
drawings, not parts.

 

I don't think it's quite as clear cut as that.
UG has been merging the I-DEAS and NX CAD programs for the last few years,
and the migration process has been steadily improving so that there will
(eventually) be no loss of associativity at all when migrating the data.

The relevance here is that at earlier releases, many of the part features
would seamlessly migrate over, but some would not, for the reasons you have
given above. What happens with those features is that they get converted to
what SWX would call "imported" features. There's no reason why this
couldn't be the way SWX saved files as an earlier version, but they choose
not to in order to maximise revenue from maintenance contracts.

It's swiings and roundabouts - if they allowed saving as an earlier version,
then unit maintenance costs would rise to compensate for that the fact that
fewer people would be forced to upgrade.

John H

 

I'll never understand how anyone can compare 2-dimensional "dumb" lines
and arcs
along with notes and text to the 3d parametric cad system.

And I suppose even if it could be done people really think this could
be done at no extra develepment cost???? They have a hard enough time
making a 2006 file work correctly
with a 2006 version of SolidWorks. And now your asking a 2007 file to
work correctly
in 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003.... I see development time and manpower
ballooing and we would
probably expect this for free as well.

I just want my 07 file to work correctly with 07 Solidworks please.
Thanks!
Don

 

Is there was a module to do that, the price of it would probably be several
times the cost of Solidworks itself.

Personally, I would gladly trade the last few years worth of new features
for a bug free version.

Bill

 

There was also once upon a time when computers and software were much
more simple in terms of program logic and system complexity. Remember
the GREAT old days of DOS!!!!
I seem to remember a famous quote from Bill Gates himself about "who
would ever need more 640 kb of ram?????"

This seems laughable now when we begin to think about the complexity of
systems and programming depth. It's actuall hard to believe how far
it's come since the DOS days.

The same holds true with CAD software. The programming and complexity
for the tools we have today I would believe compare even with any of
todays operating systems. I truley believe we have entered an era
where "backwards compatabilty" is an idea that has to be left behind in
order to move forward with the advancing complexity we demand in future
releases.

However, I don't mean to sound overly pessamistic.... ; )
Maybe one day they will prove me wrong and somehow develope a more
robust and modularized coding/information structure that will provide
for this type of backwards
compatabilty. But unitl then... I can't name one 3D CAD package (even
Autodesk's Inventor)
that can save to a previous release..... dare to dream though!

nuff said.
Don

 

This revenue excuse seems kinds of contradictive don't you think???? It
would seem to me that there IS a big demand for this type of thing.
This would be something that would draw in customers I would think...
this would be the biggest thing a 3D CAD marketer has ever had in there
selling engine. If this were simple and could be done, don't you think
someone would have developed it by now?

I think it has been seriously looked in too. I just don't think it
makes buisness sense economically for them. And I mean this in terms
of the complexity and cost in order to make this become a reality.

Don

 

Good point - but it depends on how the question to customers is phrased
!
(or they would just get the answers they want to hear - ie easy
route/status quo).

 

AutoCAD 2007 can save as previous versions 2007, 2004, 2000, and Release
14.

 

AutoCAD 2007 can save as previous versions 2007, 2004, 2000, and Release

Autocad's not a 3d modeler either....easier to maintain backwards
compatiblity when they add no new features....just lines, arcs, and
text for the most part. Also, not sure I'd trust anything saved back.
In the case of Autocad, try saving a multi paperspace page layout to a
version (r14) that didn't have that capability. Person opening it in
r14 won't even know there were extra sheets as they are now gone.

 

If new releases don't have enough VALUE in them to "coax" users to
upgrade then is is just a matter of time before some competitor figurs
out how to pull in these SW customers. The non-implementation of
backwards compatability and other similar issues to promote sales is
basically extortion and in the end this type of "marketing" will hurt
SW and the users in general.

Edt

 

No other 3d parametric cad program offers backwards compatability so
what's the incentive to switch? I'm sure it can be programmed but I can
imagine it would be a tremendous amount of effort and would be a
support nightmare for only a few handful of users that want this. Not
to mention that this would be a project for Solidworks to work on for
every new release which takes away from other development projects.

Anyway, this comes up quite a bit, if it was easy, some cad vender
would be doing it by now.

 

After reading through this post, both sides of the coin have some
valid points on what should, could, and in the future might possibly
be.

That said, it's always easiest to say what one would do "if"......
(insert phrase)

Kind of hard to see the big or overall picture when one does not have
all of the pieces, or at least have some notion of what is and is not
possible. If anything, time has shown, the human brain (intelligence)
can quite possibly figure out any solution to a problem. That said,
and not trying to get too philosophical, it's only once you
understand the rules can you truly break them.

One of the main bullet points that have been brought up is that if a
new feature is used in the program, what will it be in the past
version. The solution was thrown out; just turn it into a "dumb"
feature. But think about that for a second..... about how long your
Feature Manager Tree (FMT) can get, how many Parent child relationships
have been established, how this is just not a straight line anymore.
Parametric programs are now akin to spider webs.

And I know that we all know and understand that these "rules" are in
place. But take a step back for a second and really start to examine
what is being asked.

Take my FMT and examine the 2,3,400 features that I have,
Track and understand what was not in the previous version of the
program
Change that specific feature into a "dumb" solid
AND, make sure that ALL relationships don't blow up, so that when I
make a change everything holds true.

Not saying impossible, just a mighty big undertaking. Granted, there is
tons of new user's everyday, but by now most of you seasoned veterans
know about the sting, so there isn't any real reason to get caught by
the upgrade bug.

I dunno, just 2 cents......