Slow mouse reactions on SW 2006

Probably not much FEA is done on a graphics card.

 

Jb is reliable. You can indeed rely on him.
For what is the question.

 

Is each viewport a window?

 

Not good for those games & things?

What was it then?

Then what are you complaining about?

 

Y'know there are moderated forums that you could try - they have one at
the Solidworks corporate site www.solidworks.com

 

....and there's also www.eng-tips.com.

I fear that you may just get the same answers though. I do agree that
512MB for running ANSYS is way too small tho' - most FE codes run much
faster with lots of RAM as they can write the temporary analysis data
to RAM instead of the disk - much faster.

 

And of course the mailing list

http://groups.google.com/group/SWcad?lnk=li&hl=en

 

<< I for one do not believe that SW users don't have problems with the
Radeons >>

And I believe that support news groups are supposed to be about helping
other and not ranting and raving and getting upset someone getting something
to work that you claimed doesn't. Isn't if funny how we can both believe
something and be so wrong? It turns out that Radeon's seem to work fine and
you are wrong about that and SW news groups are just for loonies like your
self to try to undermine the help and talk users into over buy to hide SW's
laziness toward compatibility.

Still, at the end of the day I have a system that works just as I need it
for ALL my apps and you have to buy a system for SW and a system for any
other app you have. Now there is the business model that I want to follow.
One employee and several computers per and design my whole infrastructure
around one application. Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

 

<< 512MB for running ANSYS is way too small >>

Definetly. The engineers have more memory and the processor upgrades and
the other stuff is the same for the most part but I could not yank their
systems just for a test. I just set this one up so they could test the
smaller models and FEA projects to make sure all the numbers lined up before
testing on any computers in the Engineering department.

The zooming issue was taken care of with a tweak to the OpenGL settings. It
is unfortunate that rather than offer possible solutions some posters
immediately turned abusive and are angry that things turned out OK. Rather
than be glad for someone's success they try to cover up their own bogus
advice by trying to discredit you.

Why Roland ( is the post name) even claims to have been
a SW tech support person and posted that he like to come here to be abusive
to the masses because he had to be nice when he worked at Solidworks. This
guy is so insane he demanded to know my name and company I worked for and
when I would not give it to the nut case he searched years of old messages
to find it and post it on the forum. Pretty unstable. And he wonder's why
people don't want to give him their name.

 

Seemingly not or you'd probably not be whining here.

The higher end usually works for the lower.

 

No jb <G>?

 

Most of us here believe that. So why don't the two of you stop ranting and
raving?

It would be funny if it weren't so embarrassing to see two people behaving
so stupidly.

Well, if you believe that you ought to take your business elsewhere. If you
would calm down for a while you would find that this is a very helpful group
with less than normal amounts of flaming. If you treat the people here with
respect, they will reciprocate.(Almost always, nobody's perfect.)


Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"

 

Case in point, read the thread "repairing a save bodies failure". You'll see
why most of us in this group consider Matt to be a treasure. You could learn
a lot from him, if you would bother to listen. No doubt we could learn from
you, but quite a few people aren't listening any more. Lighten up, it's not
like anyone is going to give you a gold medal for scoring points here.

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"

 

Not to be picky about the who thing or to dismiss what Matt may have done
for you in the past but he was not very helpful for me and started right in
on being dismissive with a response "you should have known better". I
believe I have only been here once or twice before years ago so if I just
caught Matt on a bad day, then that is to bad but even after an informitive,
non-confrontational response he continued with how I was full of BS when I
solved my problem and then snowballed from there by him continually trying
to find fault with me rather than accept that I have found a solution for my
issue.

 

I'm not sure what this has to do about Slow Mouse reactions? Are you
talking about Matt the consultant who you paid bucks to or Matt the guy
who posts here because, like the rest of us, it is gratifying to help
people and get the most from SW?

 

I have nothing to gain by getting sucked into this, and no hope that
anything I post is going to help this fellow. He and his evil twin have
gained spots on my plonk list, so I won't see/respond to flames.

Anyway, he seemed to have had this problem before, and has received the
same advice:

So, he should have known better than to try it again because he has
heard it before. Having heard it again, he still doesn't accept it.

The argument that you have to change graphics cards every year is simply
wrong. Also suggesting that you can't run other office applications
with a card that works for SolidWorks is crazy. Tens of thousands of
people do this sucessfully. Choose a good workstation card and keep on
top of the drivers. Ive got a 4 year old machine where the low-end card
Quadro 500 has never been changed, and never been an issue. The
computer industry changes fast, and staying with one non-recommended
card is inexcusable, specious bawling notwithstanding.

I'm still unsure about what his argument is. If it's simply that
Radeons work well with SW, well, he's welcome to that opinion. I don't
know anyone who shares it, including SW Corp.

Matt

 

<< he seemed to have had this problem before >>

I have never said that I have had this problem before and that is where you
made a mistake and jumped the gun and started snowballing because you would
not acknowledge your mistake. Even that nutcase Roland had to look back two
years for a post where I had an issue and even there there was no mention of
a video problem because it was a problem with the SW holding licenses up.

<< argument that you have to change graphics cards every year is simply
wrong >>

Is it or is it not true that SW only has a limited amount of video cards and
very specific driver version listed as "certified" - yes. Do cards or
drivers fall off the list each year or certified driver versions - yes. Was
or was not the first thing you said something about getting a new video
card - yes. Did you continue to say this even after the problem was
solved - yes. Is there any way for me to determine NOW what card SW will
commit to for say 3 years - NO. You are lucky that whatever card you are
using has been certified for a few years - just lucky.

<< I'm still unsure about what his argument is >>

Well lets see what my beef could be. Rather then suggest any help I get
this:

<< you should know better than to still buy ATI cards >>

If anything, if I can get this card to work with a program as picky as SW
and still work flawlessly with my other applications it is more of an
insentive to keep the card line.

<< The machine you spec'ed was bargain basement home internet box >>

In a year what ever machine you are working on now will also look like a
bargain basement Internet box. Or do you buy new machines as fast as you
buy video cards for Solidworks? The link you posted for a machine you
advised me to buy was way cheaper that what I bought this box for so I can
only imagine that if you made the decision at the same time I purchased this
box you would have purchased that what I got or less.

<< You sound like an IT person who got caught not paying attention >>

This is exactly what I am taking about. Even after I solved the problem
with no help from you and without throwing away a good investment that works
with everything else, rather than accept the fact that the issue was solved
you continue to try to insist that nothing else other than what you use
could possibly work. So if your not using it or approve it then it can't be
good?

So, I solved a problem but rather than accept and learn from the solution
you chose to ignore and undermine the solution. Who really needs to learn
to listen here?

 

Let it go man....
everybody that's ever going to agree with you already does...

 

When a card is not listed with a newer version of SW, it just means that the
card wasn't tested, not that it is necessarily bad. As I said a long time
ago, it would be nice if SW had the resources to test every card with every
version, but I think most of the people here would rather that they put that
effort into fixing bugs.

SW probably pushes the envelope on video cards. That bothers you, but it
doesn't seem to bother many other people in the group. A lot of us buy
recommended cards. The odds are probably higher that a recommended card will
still work in three years than a non-recommended card.

Matt can be pretty single-minded some times. Perhaps he isn't listening as
well as he could. (Since he has blocked your posts, I guess he isn't
listening at all anymore.) But he has a long history in the group and most
of us find him to be a tremendous resource. If you put more effort into
listening and less into defending your actions, you would be money ahead.

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"