SW2006 file format

Discussion in 'SolidWorks' started by deimos, Sep 9, 2005.

  1. deimos

    deimos Guest

    Are the 2005 and 2006 file formats the same? Can 2005 open a 2006 part,
    assembly, etc? If not, can 2006 save out a 2005 file version?
     
    deimos, Sep 9, 2005
    #1
  2. deimos

    abc Guest

    Yea, but the DWG editor program SW includes with 2006 can open up and save
    as, all versions of AutoCAD files.

    So they can do it with AutoCAD files, just not their own files. I think
    that's pretty funny!

    Good job SolidWorks, they are just so smart!
     
    abc, Sep 9, 2005
    #2
  3. deimos

    ken.maren Guest

    i hate to do this but you're an idiot. you are talking about a 3D file
    vs. a flat 2D file. That's nearly no different than word files being
    opened from office 97 to office 2003 and back and forth. There's
    nothing to translate.

    Tell me how that one might translate a SolidWorks file that uses the
    flex feature back to SolidWorks 2003? There have been many theories
    and good ideas too but you post is by far the most idiotic post I have
    read in a long time.

    KM
     
    ken.maren, Sep 9, 2005
    #3
  4. deimos

    YouGoFirst Guest

    Isn't that why Solidworks has the STL, IGS, and other "static" 3-D formats
    available? You can save a file in the latest version and be able to read it
    in a previous version. I do realize that a "Save As" function that would go
    directly to a previous version would be nice.
     
    YouGoFirst, Sep 9, 2005
    #4
  5. deimos

    abc Guest

    Dude

    I hate to say this but I think your the idiot. To blindly assume and accept
    that no version compatibility of any sort is possible within SW is totally
    BS and you've totally suckered yourself into believing what they want you to
    believe.

    I agree that some feature types cannot import/export due to new feature
    enhancements. So what? Let them still import as dumb solids anyway and let
    the rest of the features import as normal. At the very least, let drawings
    import.

    Take a look at all the things FeaturWorks can do now. It can even recognize
    features to use as hole wizard features in dumb solids. Hard to believe
    that these kinds of technologies can't be used within SW on their own file
    structure for translations.

    Look at the evidence. You can export files as ProE, and Catia, but you
    can't export older versions of SW. You can import Catia, Pro E, UG,
    Inventor Solidedge, and Cadkey. But you can't import newer SW files. They
    got it rapped up tight only for themselves.

    As service packs are released for older versions of SW, they could include
    updates that would allow for translations to open newer file versions of SW.
    When a version of SW is no longer supported, then they could stop worrying
    about translations for it.

    I know it could be done, but they have no financial incentive to do it and
    they want everybody think it's not possible.
     
    abc, Sep 9, 2005
    #5
  6. deimos

    Jo Guest

    I would think if it is possible that the larger programs would have this
    ability. None of the solid based modelers can do this either. If you
    open a SW converted file in Pro E, all you get is one dumb solid so SW
    is not doing anything special to the file so the features come into the
    other programs.
     
    Jo, Sep 9, 2005
    #6
  7. deimos

    Jeff Howard Guest

    Wow. Must have been a stressful week.

    There's a difference between being ignorant and being an idiot. There is no
    shame associated with either. At present you are the former. Do some research
    on the subject. If, afterward, you still don't understand then maybe the latter
    should be considered. Will depend on the arguements you present.

    If you want a hint on where to start looking; UGS and PTC. Don't expect to find
    a lot of detail (relatively new approaches being developed) and don't expect to
    find full featured "translations".
     
    Jeff Howard, Sep 9, 2005
    #7
  8. deimos

    ken.maren Guest

    You're first statement was vague and just down right dumb. This
    subject has been rehashed over and over and like I said there have been
    ideas and thoughts that were and are really good ideas but you were
    comparing 2d to 3d and now you are going to attempt to spout something
    intelligent. Too late. Besides, nothing you said was a new idea.
    Start with something intelligent to say or don't say it.

    KM
     
    ken.maren, Sep 10, 2005
    #8
  9. deimos

    abc Guest

    Beta testing...that's a whole other topic that perplexes me. Who are all
    these masses of people willing to work spending their evenings, weekends or
    even their employers time troubleshooting software that they paying for, for
    free? What other industry in the world gets away operating like this?

    Anyway, have your ever noticed how the file formats change in different Beta
    versions? I find that curious. If you create parts in an older beta
    version, you can open them in a newer beta version or released version, but
    not the other way around. I suspect the reason is to prevent people from
    using pirated beta versions for production.

    The point I'm trying to make is they appear to be able to change the file
    formats and structures at the drop of a hat making few, if any changes to
    the program itself. I bet it's as easy as changing a setting number during
    the compiling process. So I wouldn't automaticy believe a change in file
    format is the result of coding changes to the program.
     
    abc, Sep 10, 2005
    #9
  10. deimos

    abc Guest

    What I see is SW digging around in other software companies back yards,
    trying to put on a good show with attempts at making both 2D and 3D file
    types importable and exportable from most the major competitors. They
    continue to improve these features while at the same time offer NO tools to
    help with their version to version compatibility issues. I view this with
    suspicion, while the SW cheerleading squad views it with total acceptance.

    If you stop and think about the financial implications of making version
    compatibility possible, it would probably result in quite harsh losses for
    the shareholders and viewed as risky. A lot of revenue could be lost when
    all the subscriptive services stopped flowing in from company's who would
    freeze upgrades. I think that's the real reason it can't be done.
     
    abc, Sep 10, 2005
    #10
  11. The betas and pre releases time out. No need
     
    Mark Mossberg, Sep 10, 2005
    #11
  12. deimos

    Cliff Guest

    Things usually migrate forwards one version at a time just fine,
    right?
    You sound like jb.
    What happened to him?
     
    Cliff, Sep 10, 2005
    #12
  13. deimos

    Jeff Howard Guest

    What I see is SW digging around in other software companies back yards,
    trying to put on a good show with attempts at making both 2D and 3D file
    types importable and exportable from most the major competitors. They
    continue to improve these features while at the same time offer NO tools to
    help with their version to version compatibility issues. I view this with
    suspicion, while the SW cheerleading squad views it with total acceptance.

    If you stop and think about the financial implications of making version
    compatibility possible, it would probably result in quite harsh losses for
    the shareholders and viewed as risky. A lot of revenue could be lost when
    all the subscriptive services stopped flowing in from company's who would
    freeze upgrades. I think that's the real reason it can't be done.
     
    Jeff Howard, Sep 10, 2005
    #13
  14. deimos

    Aaron Guest

    In SW2005 (don't know about 2006), you can RMB on the view and select
    'Properties' and there is a BOM heading in the bottom left corner. You
    can check the 'Keep linked to BOM' box and select the pull down of a
    placed BOM. That way the view will number according to the BOM, no
    matter where it is in the document.

    I don't think there is a way to do it across more than one document, though.

    Also, I believe this only works for SW BOMs, not Excel based ones.


    HTH,

    Aaron
     
    Aaron, Sep 10, 2005
    #14
  15. deimos

    deimos Guest

    Yikes, after all the replies I think I hit on a sore spot :0

    I think for the next version, SW needs to add a parseable structured
    format like XML. That way you could have all your features and
    relations in a hierarchical setup and any feature not supported could be
    ignored (and it's dependents) or skipped and still parse the rest of the
    file.
     
    deimos, Sep 11, 2005
    #15
  16. deimos

    Brian Guest

    I'd like to point out that its been more than a year since the free
    a-cad plug-in was released, and was announced some time before that. I am
    positive that its cut into a-cad's revenue, and probably pissed them off
    quite a bit.

    If it were easy, or even reasonably feasible, I am also sure that
    autodesk would have released a free plug-in to do at least limited backwards
    translation of solidworks. They haven't. To my knowledge, they are not
    even working on it. That says something about the inherant difficulty
    involved.

    The fact that solidworks released their a-cad plug-in, knowing that it
    would paint a bullseye on their back, also says that they know it would be
    unlikely that a-cad ( or any other software company for that matter ), could
    implement a useable translator.
     
    Brian, Sep 12, 2005
    #16
  17. deimos

    Cliff Guest

    Still awaiting jb's glowing press reports on the XML kernel ...
     
    Cliff, Sep 12, 2005
    #17
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.