Service Packs and Enhancements

What happened to the days when we'd get enhancements (additional
functionality other than bug fixes) through service packs?

 

Can't say it won't happen again, but enhancements should be secondary to
providing bug fixes. SolidWorks has enough bugs to keep their
programmers busy all the time. Why should one want them to be spending
their time providing enhancements before new releases come out?

I suspect SolidWorks management will sometimes provide enhancements when
several conditions are met (I know I would want these conditions to be
met if I were in their shoes):
1) The capability should probably have been there in the release
2) The capability is easy to implement
3) The capability doesn't effect backward compatibility

'Sporky'

 

Jeff,
I think we still are. Looking at the release notes for 2004...

SP1
Control the color of imported and non-imported dims
Balloon "picking" order
"slant" handles on dims
...and others

SP2
Drag blocks using sketch points
New feature added to "check sketch"
....and others

Richard

 

Them days are over Jeff.

Malcontent
'04 Dodge 2500 CTD Lairamie 48RE 4X2 SWB
pulling
'04 Forest River T23FBL w/Slide

 

They're still making "enhancements" in the SP's, but I wish to god they'd
stop.

Tucking seemingly innocuous enhancements into an SP is a quality control
nightmare waiting to happen--and let's just say that SW's quality control
hasn't been what one might hope for in the past.

 

Why would you want enhancements before most of the existing bugs are
squashed?

 

Good question.

The last that I remember was the 'super service pack', which, as memory
serves, was maybe SP3 or 4 for 2001+, when integrated toolbox was introduced
along with a bunch of other stuff that was not ready at the time of the
release of 2001+. As I recall, it didn't work out that well. It might be
fun to go back and look at what everyone's opinion was on the newsgroup
around that time - I suspect it wasn't all that warm or fuzzy

Enhancements that get squeezed into service packs don't have the same
opportunity to be alpha and beta tested as major releases do (and we know
that even then big problems get through). Sure, little tweaks still make it
into service packs - like 'finally getting to assign 'normal to' to a
keystroke, etc - but bigger enhancements are probably best left to major
releases so folks can bang on them for 3-4 months during the pre-release
cycle. I at least kinda hope that they continue that way.
-Ed

 

Do you know for a fact that everyone in development works on bugs after a
release is put out? I would find it hard to believe that they don't use
resources to not only fix current issues, but develop new ones, ahem, I mean
new functioanlity as well.

I suspect that as the software grows more robust that they have their hands
full in just keeping up with providing new stuff with each major release.
That way instead of adding 10 features over the next year to 2005 they can
say that 2006 has 250 new features rather than 240. I'm sure there is a lot
of factors that determine things, but the fact is they once provided
enhancements along the way and people often looked forward to them.

 

Richard,

I guess it depends on the person. None of the little enhancements have
really been major to me and I'm sure they have been to people whom those
enhancements save time everyday. I was thinking more along the lines of the
'super service packs' and 'Plus' editions of the software.

 

Have you ever upgraded SolidWorks? Then why install all that new
functionality only to still deal with old bugs as well as introduce new
ones?
Think of 2005 as a super service pack for 2004. The fact is simple, there
will always be bugs and always a need for enhancements.

The point I'm making is that I miss getting those occasional enhancements.
It's kinda like AutoCAD express tools when they used to come out on CD. But,
I realize that there are a lot of driving factors in handling new
functionality that is thrown in. Marketing and support are two major ones I
can think of.

 

I used to have a lot of problems with the software when working with large
assemblies. It got to the point where we were looking at alternative CAD
programs. So I understand why a lot of people feel they want all the bugs
eliminated before they go adding anything. Now that I'm on smaller
assemblies, I don't mind the little nagging, non-show stopper stuff.

Express tools were cool to try out in my AutoCAD days. I loved getting that
CD once every month or so. And a few of them really saved me a lot of time.
I liked the 'super' service packs and the mid-year 'plus' releases of
SolidWorks as well.

 

I agree. But, I still liked getting the new stuff more than once a year. Oh
well. Better to have it tested than to have to test. Or test less? ;p

 

Jeff,
I was only responding to your initial statement, and I understand that some
of the "enhancements" have been minor. But they are there, and will likely
continue with things that maybe aren't quite ready for a major release.

I think as the product has matured, the "need" for +'s and "super service
packs" has diminished. Or perhaps they've decided that once-a-year is a
better use of resources. Like Ed E. mentioned, if they have more time with
development and testing, the chances of a good release increase.

Nice to have you back, are you getting more invloved in CAD again?

Richard

 

Sort of. Personal life has been busier. At my current job I'm THE mechanical
guy. Everything from the napkin sketches to building wood shipping crates
and everything in-between is my department. I use CAD maybe 10-20 hours a
week at most. I kinda like the variety of responsibilities and new
challenges, but I surely miss being able to have time to push SolidWorks and
really learn it inside and out. I'm still not 100% on everything 2004
introduced. I was interested in 2005 and signed up for the Beta testing, but
I really didn't have the time to do so. I didn't even make it past page 20
in the Whats New!

 

I realize that, but they didn't do that with 2004...and it came out this
time last year.

I would think that with the absence of backwards compatibility that a major
release every 6 months was too much of a pain to coordinate for some people.
I understand why they limit adding major functionality often, I just miss
the perks of being subscription. No magazine, no super service packs...etc.
Maybe its a cost cutting measure since the software is more complex and
supporting it has become more resource intensive. It surprises me that their
costs on everything have always stayed the same, if not offering more for
the money.

 

No, my understanding is that they have a group working on bug fixes in
tandem with those working on new features -- hopefully communicating and
coordinating very closely between the groups. This seems to me to
likely be the cause of some of the problems between releases. Basically
they have to place major code updates on top of minor code updates done
by others on the fly, potentially compounding problem upon problem. I
don't for a moment think that it's not an economic necessity to work at
both ends at the same time in order to be competitive in this very
competitive marketplace, but it does seem to pose a lot of potential
problems. The logistics must be complex to say the least, and they
probably do about as well as one can reasonably expect, if not better
than one can reasonably expect. (My most grievous complaint with
SolidWorks is not their development teams' capability, but their
tendency to release before it's appropriate relative to the level of
bugs.)

I rather suspect that as software grows more complex it does NOT grow
more robust, but rather much the opposite.

 

The plus editions are just another major realease, not a service pack. For

Possibly a coincidence, but the only "Plus" versions Ive seen SWX do
(98 Plus, 2001 Plus) also coincided with a major change to the
parasolid modeling kernel.