SW 2004 Bugs, per Solidworks

Following from: http://www.d-digest.com/soliddigitaldigest/v4i5/usernews.html
It sure makes me feel good to know that the product was released with
over 200 verified Bugs!

Also,there was a note that SW plans to release SW 2005 this summer!
I'm still waiting for SP2 of 2004 to stay released before I give in to
2004.

I have to say, this game of a completely new release every year, with
no backward compatibility, is becoming a royal pain when trying to
deal with outside vendors who are sometimes behind and sometimes ahead
on revisions. How about fixing the bugs in the current version and
letting us use it for a while before forcing us to start over?

Just one users thoughts.

-Mike

1,057 Bugs Found in SolidWorks 2004 in Company-sponsored Beta Contest

Chris Garcia, VP of R&D at SolidWorks also cited some impressive QA
statistics at the press dinner Monday night. SolidWorks worked with
more than 3,600 users during beta testing for SolidWorks 2004. There
was a competition to see who could find the most problems. After 4,776
hours of usage, a total of 1,057 verified bugs were identified. Garcia
said that 80% of those bugs were fixed before first customer ship of
the new release on September 8, 2003.

Incentive prizes included a HP workstation and several i-Pods, with
users earning points according to how many bugs they discovered. The
top five performers by points were:

Jason Caprioti: 445
Stefan Berlitz: 393
Scott McFadden: 392
Casey Kimes: 233
Clarence Ivester: 231
Garcia said a similar beta test program for the next release will
being in May. The goal is to capture 2,100 bugs – twice as many as the
previous release.

 

Hmmmm..... how do you choose which 200 are in the best interest of the
customer to leave out? (you can't). How do you release a new version in
less than every 12 months, that isn't backward compatible, in the best
interest of the customer (you can't).

They know exactly what they are doing and why. Problem is... most of us
have it figured out by now, or are just starting to figure it out. I say no
more revenue from maintenance until they start earning it again. And I
won't play their game of forced updates based on incompatibility. It used
to be a functional matter. Now it's a matter of principle.

- Eddy

 

"Garcia said a similar beta test program for the next release will
being in May. The goal is to capture 2,100 bugs - twice as many as the
previous release."

2005 is actually coming out in May! I don't care if they call it Alpha or
Beta 0. It'll still be SP0 to me!

Are they setting themselves up for more bugs or what!

 

SW 2004 is meant to be SW 2.0.04. in may, we'll got the 2.0.05.
wait until the 2.1 for a stable version just like an open source softtware.
you could use the soft but please report the bug.
SW is a non free opensource-like

Xand

 

2005 is actually coming out in May! I don't care if they call it Alpha or

.... so much for my speculation that the next release would be '04+

 

this by itself does not really bother me. If you waited to fix EVERY bug,
then you would never release any software.

The problem is the severity of those known bugs.

-Cuts defined to offset from surface are broken. That never should have
gotten out the door.
-Random suppression of features. Again, never should have been released.
-PDF printing is bro....oh wait....
-I know there're other bugs out there that are very annoying. Add you
favorite here!

Some bugs really don't matter. If there's a quick, easy workaround, it's not
that big of a deal. The problem is when there is no workaround, and SW
knows this, and releases the software anyways because of the
marketing-droids.

-nick e.


p.s. actually, there is one more problem. 200 verified bugs. I am pretty
sure that a good number of bugs I have submitted to my VAR are ones they
didn't know about. <sigh> Bugger SW.

 

Can Chris Garcia, VP of R&D at SolidWorks be such an idiot to be proud of
that many bugs being in the software in the first place.

 

well 80 % fixed sounds good -it was generous of some users to find their pre
release problems for them -however it still hasn't helped their own internal
quality control...the real problem, witness a canned sp2. SW2005 will have
to be absolutely outstanding feature wise--splines control,many weld types,
speed improvement etc. to maintain my loyalty through another sp circus.
why do we have this PR bravado when we should be getting an apology?
i'm getting sick of this 3 monkeys approach to customers.
a more suitable goal might be to be to write software where testers can only
find 525 bugs....
ok whinge over

 

I think you will find that the 80% were the easy ones. The other 20%
probably required fundamental changes too great to address in beta.

 

SW blinking out of existence for no good reason.

Jim S.

 

Until you realize that there are probably more bugs that weren't
discovered than bugs that were. They are like cockroaches. If you see
2, there are 200 nearby.

Jim S.

 

also, that's just the bugs that they acknowledge. Kinda like MS. It's not a
bug or security hole until there's a lot of bad press about it.

-nick e.

 

No what this shows is why software companies do not want to be open with
some users. Every software product on the market has the exact same issues.
Developing software is imperfect. You guys SCREAM for more openness and
forthcoming. Yet you then SCREAM when you get a little insight.



Was this statement smart? Apparently not. You have proved one thing.



"The truth? You can't handle the truth"



If any software product fixed every known bug. It would never ship. It is
always a matter of a balancing act. That is reality. That is until
Cybernetics Corp takes over and writes it's own product.



Maybe SW would actually be willing to participate on this forum if it wasn't
just a exercise in futility.



Many of the posts here are being written directly by Autodesk personnel.
Turns out that 3 Autodesk personnel actually attended SWW under false
identities. They got caught sneaking out at the end of the event. How many
are doing the same here?. Hell Autodesk put out a full page advertisement in
Boston Globe, USA today and New York Times directed at SWW participants
attacking SW, on Tuesday. You just have to realize the dynamics that are
taking place at a higher level. Very nasty.

 

No what this shows is why software companies do not want to be open with
some users. Every software product on the market has the exact same issues.
Developing software is imperfect. You guys SCREAM for more openness and
forthcoming. Yet you then SCREAM when you get a little insight.

Was this statement smart? Apparently not. You have proved one thing.

"The truth? You can't handle the truth"

If any software product fixed every known bug. It would never ship. It is
always a matter of a balancing act. That is reality. That is until
Cybernetics Corp takes over and writes it's own product.



Maybe SW would actually be willing to participate on this forum if it wasn't
just a exercise in futility.



Many of the posts here are being written directly by Autodesk personnel.
Turns out that 3 Autodesk personnel actually attended SWW under false
identities. They got caught sneaking out at the end of the event. How many
are doing the same here?. Hell Autodesk put out a full page advertisement in
Boston Globe, USA today and New York Times directed at SWW participants
attacking SW, on Tuesday. You just have to realize the dynamics that are
taking place at a higher level. Very nasty.

 

Yaaahh ... methinks THIS post is written by a SolidWorks employee.

'Sporky'
PS, I am NOT and would never stoop to being an AutoDesk employee, or an
employee of one of their VARs.

 

Ok, come clean...

Who are you?
Who from ade$k was caught at SWW?
What posters are ade$k employees?
Where are the Boston Globe, USA Today and NY Times articles?
Who at ade$k's higher level? (I don't doubt this, adesk is scum)

BTW, who is paranoid at SW Corp?? You and a few others maybe?

Just the facts, mam.

...

 

Another corporate group hug load of crap. All we ask is that priorities be
placed on the issues that matter. Fix the clipping in 2003 before forcing
down another road of "can't go back". Concentrate on surfacing bugs,
lofting bugs, random suppression bugs, backward compatibility issues, etc.
in 2004. Then worry about new "features" and business relationships like
bluebeam. Not only can we handle the truth, we are the truth.

Don't flatter yourselves, ade$k wouldn't waste much time in here. I used to
deal with those monolithic asses on a weekly basis, until jumping ship and
going with SW. If you think SW thinks they can get away with murder, you
must remember that ade$k defined the genre. That was around 1997. The
reason we jumped back then, for the same behavior that SW is handing out
now. Statistics, glossy brochure "features" to attract new users, all while
messing with the long term stability of a package that we bought and
depended on for billable time.

Eddy Hicks
Solid Logic Design Inc.
www.solidlogicdesign.com
847-428-1166

(no secrets here)

 

That is simply not true. I use dozens of different pieces of software
on a daily basis that don't suffer from such problems. Heck, a few of
them I wrote myself. Many were created by amateurs who understand the
concept of quality.

No one is asking for perfection. All that is desired is quality. It is
currently not present in many aspects of the software.

There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics. Revealing how
many bugs were found by beta testers isn't a very useful data point.

More nonsense. The only bugs that fall into such a category are bugs
that would require vast changes to the internal working of SW. Such
bugs are rare. The vast majority of 'known bugs' can be fixed in short
order. If the code is well written.

Several hundred regular posters clearly think otherwise. The simple
fact is that the highest quality questions and answers are asked and
given in this newsgroup. I dare say that many folks here are far more
familiar with SW than most SW employees, including the coders who likely
haven't designed/detailed a mechanical component at any point in their
career.

Oh please.

How does one get caught 'sneaking out'? Furthermore, why would Autodesk
employess need to create 'false identities'? What organizatin do you
have to be a card carrying member of in order to attends Solidworks
World? I thought the event was open to anyone. Were charges filed
against these brazen impersonators? Fraud is a crime after all....

However many the voices in your head tell you.

Well desreved from where I stand. Hint: The best way to prevent your
competitors from attacking is to *not* provide them with ammunition.

Cue the black helicopters.....

Not half as nasty as the random suppression of features and CTDs I fight
every day.

Jim .

 

yeah right. names maybe?

and SW employees don't attend adesk events?

and i'm sure SW doesn't have any copies of inventor lying around for
comparison either.

Hell, *I* have attended trade shows with a fake name and company badge. Just
because you get more attention if the salesman thinks you're a customer
instead of an OEM. Nice way to learn about competition and the industry in
general. We also buy competitors products to look at.

at least it was justified.

maybe if you fixed your software instead of complaining about the users
demanding stability, consistency, etc you'd be better off.

It's kinda like South Park and "Red Hot Catholic Love." "We need to find a
way to stop these boys from telling people we've been having sex with
them!" "No! The issue is you need to stop having sex with boys."
(paraphrased)

Maybe if SW worked on the issues with the software, people would stop
complaining. Now THERE'S a concept.

-nick e.

 

Mark, Paul, Eddy, Nick, Jim and Ken have pretty well said the things that
need to be said. So why should I listen to you instead of them? Come out,
come out, wherever you are!

Seems like the top two guys are/were regulars on this group (or am I mixing
Jason up with someone else?). For all I know the other three are also. Seems
like SW ought to listen to the folks here a little more.


Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems