Quality of Software - Survey

I've been involved in a discussion for some time with some people at
the executive level with SolidWorks. We don't see eye to eye on what I
perceive as ongoing issues with SolidWorks. The executive in question
does not feel that my concerns are representative of mainstream
machinery designers using SolidWorks and said to me "the preponderance
of customers are extremely satisfied with the level of quality of
software and service provided by SolidWorks"

Now I'm wondering how it's possible that I'm one of a few that feels
that SolidWorks software and service quality is poor. The software
speaks for itself. The support service, although usually prompt,
rarely actually results in a bug being addressed. In fact there are
problems with SolidWorks that have persisted for the 10 years that
I've been using the software.

So, I'm looking for some comments to see who agrees or disagrees with
the statement "the preponderance of customers are extremely satisfied
with the level of quality of software and service provided by
SolidWorks".

TIA

 

What points in particular do you disagree on?

Service sucks, as it does for all software. I've never had a problem
that SW support could solve.

 

I am also one of the dis-satisfied CAD managers along with 10 users.
Your case may be similar as we are now pushing the software beyond its
initial capabilities. This really has to do with SolidWorks target
customers. In my case, we are not them (sounds like you are there
beside me). Due to lack of acceptable support i have been looking at
other software and up-front giving them a needs and wants listing. i
am willing to share mine if you would like. In the CAD review i have
2 mid range cost survivors (wildfire base $5K and Inventor base $5K)
and 2 higher cost survivors (Catia base $12K and NX base $12K). All
of these go up from there but i am amazed on the Wildfire cost
breakdown as it stands today, their high end is about $12K for
everything, and the product looks very good and capable. I hate to
think that we will have to go through training cycles again but we
have to be productive with our tool. The quality of our current tool
is less than likeable in many areas and as i see newer releases i
cringe on what will not work this time. I am getting closer to a
change over, probably around mid year, this year. iQ

 

The discussion started after upgrading to SW 2008 where I discovered
that it's not only slower but buggier and crashes more. From there my
rants have included the failure of SolidWorks to address some bugs
that have existed for years, lack of true functionality in Weldments
(steel profiles missing, inability to resolve weld beads around
irregular forms, no means of accomodating material cut size gaps, etc.
etc.) Inability of SolidWorks to add to the Toolbox (it's been
unchanged in eons), missing standard threads in Hole Wiz (UNEF,
Buttress thread callouts, ACME etc.) Ongoing "Failed to Save" issues.
Plate steel shape thickness changing arbitrarily in SW 2008, display
issues I did not have before, The usual ongoing beefs from ages ago,
no parametric link between a view label and it's scale for example. I
could go on and on and have. The official SW response is that SW rocks
and I'm on the fringe of users if I'm having this many problems.

It bugs the hell out of me that they add crap like the crinkly paper
effect in SW 2008 and spend money on iPods for everyone at SW world
but can't be bothered to add UNEF threads to the hole wiz or update
the weldment profiles. It's clear where there priorities lie.

I myself have never had a true bug solved by SW, I get SPR numbers
though which are real handy for nothing!

 

We are also looking at switching and the two packages that are being
considered are Pro/E and Wildfire. A previousl employer of mine that
was a larger SolidWorks customer migrated to Pro/E. I'd be interested
in discussing this further with you if possible. Drop me a line at
devlin at terramax machine (all one word) dot com.

Thanks

 

I meant to say Pro/E and Inventor.

 

The old "Silent" majority vs. "Vocal" minority argument....LOL.

I would not classify myself in the "extremely satisfied" group. Over
all I am happy with the performance of SolidWorks, it does what I need
and reacts how I expect (not many surprises).

There is room for improvement as is the case with any product. I work
with large assemblies so "I" would not choose SolidWorks as my
preferred CAD software however SolidWorks is the product we have and
it works.

There are two reasons "I" would choose not to purchase SolidWorks:

1) Working primarily with Large Assemblies
2) Backwards and forward compatibility

Tom

 

So, I'm looking for some comments to see who agrees or disagrees with

The level of quality was extremely satisfactory in 99 (feature completeness
was not). Service seems to vary from VAR to VAR. Our first VAR was very
responsive... they went out of business.

I think that there must be a large number of users who just go to work and
then go home without caring how much of their time is wasted, or else they
are only casual users.

I would love to see actual survey data concerning customer satisfaction for
all the major CAD players. But a proper survey is probably too expensive to
undertake for anyone actually interested in the results.

Myself, I'm sliding more and more toward CAD-quality fatalism. CAD sucks,
I'm going back to work.

 

Beats standing at a drafting board all day, day in and day out.......

 

I've been using SW since version 97 and I have to say.... I really
love using it
and it really is great seeing just how much it's changed over the
years in terms of
functionality.

Now, before the eye rolling begins, this is not to say that its
without its fair share of
flawS. if there's one thing I know form using it more than 10 years
it's this.
SOLIDWORKS HAS ITS FLAWS!!!! But I have never heard of perfect CAD
software of any version
by any name. It's the question of how much progression do we want vs
stability?
I guess the other hypothetical question is how much imperfection along
with progression is the perfect balance?
Who knows..... everyone has different opinions about this.

Anyways, I seem to be going on a tangent here.

For anyone, including top Sw exectutives that believe there are no
ongoing issues\problems, let me say this...

THEY HAVE NOT USED SOLIDWORKS IN A PRODUCTION ENVIROMENT WITH BOSSES,
DUE DATES, TIMELINES, CHANGES, REVISIONS,ETC... FOR A LONG PEROID OF
TIME.

Sitting down to model a tutorial or work with it for a week means
absolutely nothing.

Come talk to me when they have concepted, modeled, designed, detailed,
released, prototyped, redesigned, changed, and then updated models and
drawings again for release. My point is it's actually using
solidworks in a work enviroment is where you'll begin to completely
understand where the users are coming from.

Well, I guess I ranted long enough. I have coworkers that have been
using Solidworks for years with questions like these
sometimes daily\weekly


1) I'm working on this assembly and drawings and get a "A component is
in Rollback position" error.
How do I fix this?

2) Why am I getting a "Failed to save document" error
How do I fix this?

3) Why don't my cosmetic threads display correctly in my drawing?
How do I fix this?

4) Why don't my Datums in drawings stay put?
How do I fix this?

5) Why can't I reattach a dangling dimension in a drawing?
How do I fix this?

6) I get a "No bodies are selected in feature scope" when creating
holes. I have bodies selected.
How do I fix this?

7) Why is it everytime I load an assembly "lightweight" something
doesn't work properly or drawings aren't right?
How do I fix this?

8) Why do my hole callouts sometimes not give me the abiltiy to change
the precision on certain values?
How do I fix this?

9) Why did this feature fail.... It worked the last time I opened
this file?
How do I fix this?

10) WHY IS IT WE WASTE SO MUCH TIME DURING THE DAY TRYING TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS LIKE THESE WHEN USING SOLIDWORKS!!!!

PLZ forward this to any exectutive and I will galdly be available to
answer any of his\her questions.

Don
Norgren Automotive

 

Don, I feel your pain with the numbers of other users.

I did want to add one other item.

Why will SolidWorks corp. or VAR's share their expertise in the usage
of their software and come out to users sites and see the pain that we
are in? A simple trip to a users location could itentify and solve
users issues when emails and phone chats will not! I am not talking
about the small issues, but the issues that we cannot resolve in a
phone call or ten. You need to see how we are using your software and
why we are doing it the way that we are doing to provide help. Help
is all that we are asking for, not a phone call/email run around. iQ

 

Very displeased here!

It should be illegal to sell a product under false pretense then charge for the
service packs to fix the faulty product.

The upgrades/new releases should have an upgrade fee but not the service packs
that fix a faulty product. The fixes should be part of the original purchased product.

Sounds like a good class action law suit to me.

Joseph

 

This has been my feeling as you and others expressed. You guys see it
a lot more because you have a large crew of SolidWorks users who
remind you every day when something goes wrong.

Large software companies often send their people into their customers
facilities to work with them for weeks to verify what the actual
operating environment on the ground is seeing. I haven't heard of
SolidWorks doing anything like that, but I think it would give them
enourmously valuable feedback.

I'm using 2006, though I paid for the 2007 upgrade, and I just can't
justify starting use of 2008 early on in the year. Experience has
told me not to upgrade at least until Summer, as I can't afford the
inefficiency.

I hope SolidWorks personnel might take some advice from a few people
with better business management sense than me:

1. Peter Drucker: "The bottleneck is always at the top of the
bottle."
............There must be direction from the CEO & Board, or nothing
is likely to change.

2. Warren Buffett: "The business schools reward difficult complex
behavior more than simple behavior, but simple behavior is more
effective."
............If there is no willingness to use a simple onsite customer
audit, there is likely little change to come.

3. Steve Jobs: "Design is not just what it looks like and feels
like. Design is how it works."
............If there is no true understanding of "how it works." in
real customer's hands, there will be no true Software Design
improvement.

I want to see SolidWorks improve in usability. I can easily face a
year without new features. I simply think major upgrades every year
is too intensive to properly debug before giving it to users and then
users having to relearn and do workarounds too much. It is a mess.
Neither Apple, Adobe or Microsoft give yearly upgrades to their major
software.

Yearly major upgrades appear to me to be an item forced by the Board
of Directors demands for increasing sales each year & the CEO and CFO
structure "major upgrades" yearly to meet the Board's demands.

I think it is nearly impossible to do a yearly major release and get
it bug free enough to be truly a first class product. I would vote
for a 2 year cycle, but of course a CEO who tried that would likely
cause the CEO to be fired.

 

My biggest gripe lately is how SW boogered up the search path sequence
for finding components. Used to be (pre-2006) that SW went through
each folder in the search path list before wandering off elsewhere.
NOW SW looks in the first folder, wanders all over the place before
getting to the #2 folder in the list. This makes it more likely that
SW will find the WRONG version of a file.

I do work for a lot of small companies that need to make do without
PDM. A sound search structure is vital for this to happen. All but
impossible now.

I'm surprised more people aren't complaining about this.

 

So, I'm looking for some comments to see who agrees or disagrees with

SolidWorks users don't have the control needed when using SolidWorks
and it's obvious that most SolidWorks users don't care about having
the needed control.

http://machinedesign.com/ContentItem/68359/HowwasthatmodelbuiltSoftwaretellsall.aspx

"Have you ever had to edit an assembly or a part designed by someone
else, or change a model you designed a long time ago?

If so, you know how difficult it is to decipher the mate relationships
in assemblies and dependencies between part features. That's because
modern solid modeling lets users create complex relationships, without
even being aware they are doing so. For example, a user might add a
fillet, which generates relationships between the arc of the fillet
and the features that created the edges.

Editing models can thus lead to unpredictable results, such as lost
design intent or features that fail when rebuilding models."

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

http://machinedesign.com/ContentItem/68359/HowwasthatmodelbuiltSoftwaretellsall.aspx

"Designers often rebuild designs from scratch rather than spend time
to understand how models were built."

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

LOL........straight from the mouth of an inexperienced beginner....

"I'm trying to finish The SolidWorks Bible" - Jon Banquer - Aug 8,
2007

"I just spent $600 for the SolidProfessor Professional Bundle
SolidProfessor pretty much adheres to a 100 percent hands on tutorial
approach. So far I'm very happy with the SolidProfessor video
tutorials and feel it's money well spent. " - Jon Banquer - June 25,
2007

"I've been away from SolidWorks for almost ten years. At this point I
spend the majority of my day on SolidWorks 2007. The program has
changed so much in ten years that I'm still way behind where I need to
be." -Jon Banquer - Aug. 26, 2007

 

Speaking of inexperienced beginner, Tom Brewer, Usenet stalker and all
around incompetent idiot.

Ignorant:

"Jon, I never forgot any of your postings about SDRC I made the wrong
decision in spite of what you said. There have been a number of times
that my Wife has told me to be careful in dealing with someone and
after words says "I told you so". She earned the right to say it as
well as you have earned the right to say I TOLD YOU SO. I made a
decision that went against my better judgment and as usual it turned
out poorly." .... Tom Brewer

Ignorant:

"I do not purchase programs unless I know before hand that they are
what I want and/ or need."... Tom Brewer who can't follow his own
advice. See above.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer thinking he and his pals like Joe788 can play their Usenet
staking games, lie on a repeated basis and suffer no consequences for
doing so.

Ignorant:

"I have shot myself in the foot, not an easy thing to do when it is
in your mouth and your head is in your ass."... Tom Brewer admitting
what he's often like.

Ignorant:

Someone who has a proven track record of not being able to deal with
or accept the kind of change that occurs in the cadcam market... now
that's ignorant or should we say that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Someone who doesn't live in San Diego yet insists there is no shortage
of CNC machinists here... now that's ignorant or should we say that's
Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Someone who criticizes someone on SolidWorks but has never helped
anyone with specific SolidWorks answers. Someone who is not able to
answer any questions that "Vinny" had on master modeling or skeletal
modeling. Someone who has never posted any models they have done...
now that's ignorant or should we say that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer's failure to understand who Matt Lombard really is.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer's unable to comprehend what's on the cover of the
SolidWorks Bible:

"Whether you're a new, intermediate, ...."

Ignorant:

Someone who can't understand more than a simple "I love it!" or "I
hate it!" type of comment ... now that's ignorant or should we say
that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer implies that because you acknowledge that the $25
SolidWorks course covers subjects / topics that the $650 SolidWorks
course didn't that you're now somehow an idiot and got screwed when
you decided to purchase the $650 SolidWorks course.

Tom Brewer Writing About SmartCAM:

"I ended up paying a consultant $40.00 per hour for two weeks."

"FYI, when I said "Solid modeling" in reference to SmartCam it was
tongue in cheek. What you could not see is that when I was typing that
I was laughing to myself. Anyone that uses SmartCam and Solid
Modeling in the same sentence cannot be taken seriously."

Recently Tom Brewer said SmartCAM had no user interface problems and
yet the record shows Tom Brewer thinks SmartCAM does indeed have user
interface problems:

"The only real problem that I run into is that the screen can get
cluttered and it becomes difficult to pick and choose elements in Free
Form. I just use the utility masking feature to hide what is in the
way, that cures the problem but it does add work (I tried the snap
filtering and snap options but for me it was not the best way), I
have seen other packages that handle picking and choosing in better."

Conclusion:

Tom Brewer thinks he's a SolidWorks expert. A SolidWorks expert is
someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows
absolutely everything about nothing.


Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

The old "Silent" majority vs. "Vocal" minority argument....LOL.

Is this about you and your wife again?

You're too stupid to know what the problems in SolidWorks are, Brewer.

Wow, that's really a brilliant observation. Right up there with your
hero and mentor Cliffy Huprich.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Unlike you Jon, I use the software on a daily basis in a production
environment. Since you are a beginner Jon I expect you to have
problems and encounter issues that I am long past.

All you do Jon is pose as an expert, parrot what you read, post your
crib notes, copy and paste advertisements, buzzwords from others. I
haven't seen you post original content so if you're having specific
problems or issues post them to this group and ask for help.

Tom