short beta for 2009

ok to put a bit of life back into this recessive group heres a recent bit of
news that seems to have gone without much comment anywhere..

beta for 2009 will be 8 weeks not 15 as last time - according to Mike
Pluckets blog entry.

Now in looking around the net a bit to remind myself about whats been
happening since I was seriously engaged with following the life and times of
SW I rediscovered this youtube item originally from matt in Jan


Now is there anyone out there who believes these two positions - (the
striving for 'quality','performance' and 'scalability' as espoused by the
new CEO as a message he had his ears warmed with many times to good effect
vs. the new apparently castrated beta phase)- are consistant and will lead
to a better release this time?

Is this foreshortening an admission that beta testing in the past was just
an entertaining diversion for 'believers' encouraged by the marketing
department or have they just taken the axe to something very valuable?

Is beta for instance now relegated to a show and tell primer for future
sales or is it an honest vetting of things to be duly attended to in due
course?...

Many people were of the opinion previous beta testing didnt actually produce
real results by the time sp0 shipped if at all or that the rewards didnt
match the effort they might have put into it, so does it actually matter
what they do with it? does the offering of more prizes engage you as never
before or would you prefer discounts from subs for example?..

Do you expect the shorter beta will mean the release wont mature until even
later than usual and even more people will leave it on the shelf than 08?
If you have alot of seats on subs are you happy about that possiblity?
Is this a make or break time for you as a loyal customer?

I seem to remember SW moved from beta to beta in ridiculously short periods
recently - even skipped directly to release before people got a decent look
at it or there was a something akin to a release candiate.

If the gestation period has been longer this time is that indicative of a
higher internal standard? their difficulty getting stuff to work? probably
too much new stuff after all? perhaps another wrong turn in management
thinking...

What are your views about the changes?
Does it do anything to discourage you or inspire you to particpate in beta?
If you are sitting on the subs fence now does this make you want to make
your perch a little more comfortable?

Presumably people have balked at upgrading for a number of reasons - most
noteably the bugs and UI
What confidence do you have that SW are going to deliver what you actually
need this time?
Are you expecting some reworking of the interface to make it acceptable
again? perhaps you have real change as a pre condition to adoption this
time?

Is real change for the better emerging from Concorde as it seems to be in
Washington? ;o)

well a lot of leading questions there...
like to hear your hopes, views, rants etc

Neil

 

What are your views about the changes?

If SolidWorks 2009 doesn't have an answer to Siemens Siemens
Synchronous Technology you switch to the new version of Solid Edge or
UG NX 6 with Synchronous Technology and support a company who is a
technology leader rather than one who buys their technology from the
technology leader like SolidWorks Corp. does.

Siemens owns Parasolid.

Siemens own D-Cubed.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/

 

Posted in SolidWorks Corp. own official SolidWorks Forum:

"my friend is a Solid Edge reseller and I saw SE v21 and it's very
impressive.
I'm SolidWorks user from 1998 and I like it, but as Intel has did two
years ago to AMD with Core 2, I think that if SW2009 will not have
this technology, SW Corp. will lose more licenses to 2008 and 2009.

I would like a Mark Biasotti opinion here.

Thanks,
Alessandro"

Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology will not be called SE V21. It
will be called Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology because that's
how big of a breakthrough Synchronous Technology is.

It doesn't matter what forum you go to Synchronous Technology is the
story and will continue to be the story. Why? Because it's the tool
set so many people need and have needed for a very long time in their
parametric/history based modeler.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/

 

Oh sure clueless, just because you say so.

What's your next bright idea?
Everybody drive a Flintstone car because Jon Banquer says it will
solve the high fuel problem.

Jon, if it wasn't for you having your head up your ass all the time
you would be a perfect asshole.

Stan

 

What are your views about the changes?

If SolidWorks 2009 doesn't have an answer to Siemens Synchronous
Technology you switch to the new version of Solid Edge or UG NX 6 with
Synchronous Technology and support a company who is a technology
leader rather than one who buys their technology from the technology
leader like SolidWorks Corp. does.

Siemens owns Parasolid.

Siemens own D-Cubed.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/

 

This is the kind of CEO you get when you can't get a innovative CEO
because those qualified and in the know understand where the market is
going.

That handwriting was on the wall, it's easy for anyone to read... it's
Siemens Synchronous Technology.

SolidWorks should have been developing this kind of technology at a
much faster pace than they have. A HUGE mistake on the part of
SolidWorks Corp!

SolidWorks, Inventor and others are going to feel the sting very
quickly with proper marketing from Siemens and all signs are there
that Siemens is going to have the proper marketing for Synchronous
Technology

The big question... how long before CNC Software feels the squeeze, as
customers of UG NX 6 or Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology want UG
NX CAM or UG NX CAM Express instead of Mastercam?

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/

 

A shorter beta could also mean that they missed their deadline. Maybe
fixing old things took more time than creating new ones. Just
speculating.

Deelip Menezes
www.deelip.com

 

YOU don't even have or know the question.
Ask actual users (you are not one).

HTH

 

Still trying to sell ACIS kernels, are you?

 

And you have no clues at all what modifications or enhancements
were added.

Nor even if it's a *good idea* for *business* ABC.
Very clearly, in many cases, it is not. Just like they say.

 

A short beta may mean it's mostly bug fixes & no
major enhancements or that they added better
testing internally (might be possible with
some software & automation of testing) so that they
have more than usual confidence in it.
Or that the existing group of beta testers are
pretty good at finding & reporting any problems &
they want to fix any such faster. Probably
other reasons are possible as well.
What do they give as a reason?

 

So YOU are not switching from VX & 3dinkies OR getting any training or free
demos, eh?

"Please let me clarify that Jon is not affiliated with HSMWorks ApS in any way
and that we cannot control what people are writing on the web."

"Anybody can get evaluation licenses of HSMWorks and test it themselves."

"I hope this clarifies any doubt."

 

IOW They told you to buzz off.
Politely, no doubt. This time.

 

How many MasterCAM users need Solid Edge CAD instead of CAM?

LOL .... So clueless.

 

well the response to my questions hardly made it worthwhile writing...

I guess if we cant get some discussion going about some thing as important
as this to users this place is pretty much beyond revival..

later,
Neil

 

Neil,

Your beef should be more with SolidWorks Fanboi's rather than this
newsgroup. Tell me where you can find SolidWorks users really
discussing this issue? The best you will be able to find is blow hard
Matt Lombard complaining about it and his fan club agreeing with him.

I think the best you can hope for it to find a company more in tune
with what you want. For me that's obviously Siemens/UGS who has a much
better understanding than SolidWorks Corp. on the tools needed for
manufacturing.as

As you and others will see shortly SolidWorks Corp is going to pay for
this mistake big time!

Suggest you start your own blog and start telling it like it is.

When I finally had enough I did.

Having a well read blog is the biggest impact you can make on
SolidWorks Corp. at the moment.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/

 

Actually it looks like I'm the only one that responded thus
far.
What's to say about the length of time initial user
beta testing takes?
What were/will be the outcomes?

 

CLUE: UG is a CAD/CAM system.
SW is a CAD system.

Why are you STILL confused about that??

 

Not that others can post there to mock your clueless rants.

 

Neil,

Your beef should be more with SolidWorks Fanboi's rather than this
newsgroup. Tell me where you can find SolidWorks users really
discussing this issue? The best you will be able to find is blow hard
Matt Lombard complaining about it and his fan club agreeing with him.

I think the best you can hope for it to find a company more in tune
with what you want. For me that's obviously Siemens/UGS who has a much
better understanding than SolidWorks Corp. on the tools needed for
manufacturing.as

As you and others will see shortly SolidWorks Corp is going to pay for
this mistake big time!

Suggest you start your own blog and start telling it like it is.

When I finally had enough I did.

Having a well read blog is the biggest impact you can make on
SolidWorks Corp. at the moment.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com/