OK og se så posten fra Steen - han mangler en funktion så simpelt som
DXFOUT............
"Peter Andersen" <pa@nospam.dk> wrote in message
news:MPG.159d9e324f43f8ed989701@news.inet.tele.dk...
> > Hej Peter
> >
> > Taler det lange forløbne tidsrum ikke sit eget sprog?
> > Vi behøver vist ikke rippe op i det mere!
> >
> > Mvh
> > Leif
> >
>
>
> Hej, jo det gør det, men jeg kan ikke dy mig for yderligere at besvare
> SW's svar til mig d. 24 feb. Så jo jeg vil gerne underbygge mine
postulater.
> Dette har jeg så gjort nu med nedenstående kopier af debatten fra
> comp.cad.solidworks og dertil kan jeg igen sige at jeg IKKE ville vælge
> Solidworks hvis jeg var inden for maskinbranchen, og det er nu
underbygget.
>
> Hilsen Peter
>
>
> > From: "SW" <thhvejen@vejen-net.dk>
> > Newsgroups: dk.edb.cad
> >
> > > Jeg vil nok sige at jeg syntes at Solidworks parterne i denne dialog
> > > virker fuldstændig afsporet og virklighedsfjerne.
> >
> > Vil du venligst underbygge dine postulater med saglige argumenter
> >
> > > Mit indtryk er nu at hvis jeg var maskin-konstruktør, ville jeg nok
> > > hellere kigge på Autodesk produkter.
> >
> > Gør det, og kom tilbage når du har fortrudt (det er der mange andre der
har
> > gjort)
> >
> > sw
>
>
> Dugfriske indlæg fra comp.cad.solidworks, hvor debatten kører løs
>
> ***************
> Subject: Attention SolidWorks Corp.
> From: Sporkman <MUNGEsporked_again@bigfoot.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
>
> To the management and especially the marketing goofs at SolidWorks
> Corp.:
>
> Used to be that there were a number of malcontents posting in this
> newsgroup about the lack of Surfacing options in SolidWorks. There were
> more than a couple of these sourpusses, but there were also a large
> number of regulars who would simply post a question or an answer to a
> question, and once in a while would defend SolidWorks Corp from its
> detractors. Often a particular rant would be "shouted down" with
> accusations that the ranter was either a Pro-E VAR or someone who ought
> to go buy Pro-E and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
>
> In case you haven't noticed there has been a marked change in the flavor
> of the newsgroup. Now your detractors are the people who used to defend
> you. The people who have been using SolidWorks the longest are now the
> ones who are the angriest. They're the ones saying that you're
> slipping, that you aren't testing your software sufficiently, that
> you're cheating your users by charging exhorbitant maintenance fees for
> much too little.
>
> Don't you think this deserves some attention?
>
> I'm tempted to tack on a euphemism beginning with "ass" and ending with
> "holes", but I'll try to restrain myself.
>
> Sporky
> **************
> Subject: Re: Attention SolidWorks Corp.
> From: "Malcolm B. Stephens" <m.b.stephens@stethour.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
>
> Preach it brother!
> *****************
> Subject: Re: Attention SolidWorks Corp.
> From: "Don Jackson" <djackson@airfiber.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
>
> YOU TELLEM' Sporky.
>
> I am one of the people that has been using this software since 1997 and
with each new release,
> service(?) pack or upgrade, the number of bummers has consistently
increased over the years.
>
> My current company, with 11 seats, has been using SWX since its inception
in '98. I was and
> continue to be the main driver. If this s*%t keeps up there is going to
be a serious review of
> our 3D software.
>
> I hate to say it but IV is starting to look like a viable choice and I
can't stand AutoCrap's
> customer support either!
>
> SolidWorks, Inc., you better start paying attention! Joe Dunne, it's time
to relay some
> information to HQ!
>
> Don Jackson
> AirFiber, Inc.
> ***************
> Subject: Re: Attention SolidWorks Corp.
> From: "Jay Guthrie" <jguthrie@worldnet.att.net>
> Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
>
> I too am one of the main people reasonable for getting SW in our company.
I
> am becoming increasing annoyed by the direction I see things starting to
go.
> SW is becoming too modular and that was one of the things that attracted
me
> to them in the first place. The Smart Fasteners thing is total BS and is
a
> insult to anyone who pays subscription service. There is no way in hell
we
> are going to pay for that. The bugs are driving me nuts!
>
> My faith is weakening.
>
> Jay
> ***************
> Subject: Re: Attention SolidWorks Corp.
> From: "Edward T Eaton" <ed'remove_this'eaton1701@home.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.cad.solidworks
>
> I am reticent to join on the venting bandwagon, but I have to admit that I
> am at my wits end (and who knows... maybe it will do something)
>
> I have always hated SW bashing, and I have no use for the 'my software is
> better than your software' talk.
> I know the folks over at SW are trying really hard to add to the package,
> because I have had contact with many of them through multiple forums, and
> throughout those contacts I absolutely trusted their sincerity.
> A year and a half ago, I took half a day away from my work to talk to a
> SolidWorks employee who made a special trip to my workplace to talk to me
> about the needs of my perceived specialty (groovy freeform design). He
> wanted to see what SW could add to their package to make things better for
> Industrial Designers. As I remember, he was taken off guard by my
response,
> because I did not have a laundry list of extra features and whatnot, as he
> expected. Instead, I said the number one thing they needed to do was
> implement good product testing, and the number two thing that they needed
to
> do was develop better training materials that would be available to all.
> I personally have been able to use SW to model everything that I can
> imagine, but it has come at the cost of having to aggressively develop a
> deep list of crazy workarounds, and to explore and identify an elaborate
> knowledge of the exceptions to exceptions to exceptions. It has been
hard,
> and it adds hours to my weeks, but I have been able to somehow miracle
every
> fillet to work, every sketch to solve, and every loft to fly.
> Since this last release, I run into truly awful behavior on the part of
the
> software on a daily basis. It is not hard to find bugs, and it is really
> easy to find poorly thought out interface issues. When I can get around
to
> it, my accumulated list list of 'still to report' bugs is going to take
me
> six or seven hours to go through with my VAR (and I do try to pick away at
> about an hour of them every few days - just ask them).
> The thing that gets me about all of this is that testing should have
caught
> most of it. Okay, there is always some weird things that they are
probably
> not going to get right away, but there is no reason that I can think of
that
> they never found the 'tangent surface model doesn't make a tangent solid'
> bug, the 'underdefined sketch shows completely black' bug, the 'distance
> mate spin box works when first making the mate but not when editing the
> mate' bug, the 'fillets fail with every new service pack' bug, the very
> common 'back to the desktop crashes', the 'through all cut arrow won't
flip
> until you change views when in the preview' bug, the 'can't modify the
> properties on a PAW materials because it always jumps back to the default'
> bug, etc.etc. etc. (I can actually rail for about an hour on basic stuff
> that could have been caught with very rudimentary product testing... I
know
> this, because I have done just rudimentary work on SW 2001, and I have
> isolated and identified hours of them)
>
> The way that I understand SW Corp is set up, they can't do real world
> testing. I have suggested here and elsewhere that SW hire a couple of
guys
> who's sole function is to model stuff (Monday morning :"here - make this
> stapler, with all drafts in place on the plastic, make sure all of the
> sheetmetal can unfold, and do production quality drains."...), and have
been
> told that it is simply not an option for SW to direct two salaries at this
> task. I even made the pitch that SW would develop a model database that
> they could freely use for sales and training, both of which would generate
> revenue in addition to helping out the user base. Still not possible.
>
> So, as most of us here know, we general users are earmarked to be the real
> product testers. And, due to the way we users have learned to cope with
the
> situation, the bugs are not going to be found until many months into the
> release.
>
> At the last meeting of the Chicago SolidWorks user group, I personally led
a
> discussion on how members' companies were rolling out SW2001. The telling
> thing is that, for the most part, companies have a policy of not adopting
SW
> until the second or third SP is released.
> This is learned behavior. No one can debate this point. VAR's advise it
as
> a matter of course. It is widely known and accepted that SW releases
> software that will not work.
> The SW employees who are monitoring this can feel uncomfortable. They can
> question my motives (though they shouldn't). They can remind everyone
that
> they mean well (which I believe that they do). They can talk about how
> successful the software is (and it should be - it can be really great when
> it works) But the basic point can not be challenged. SW releases software
> that does not work. Period.
>
> And that is why I am at my wits end.
>
> The next thing that was telling about my poll at the user group meeting
was
> a poll of when members got around to bug reporting. Maybe a third of the
> folks even messed around with the software before their companies
rollout...
> and two thirds of that group found bugs. Only one of that group actually
> reported the bugs. Out of thirty people at the meeting, one reported bugs
in
> time for it to effect the first couple of SPs.
>
> As long as SW has this policy of releasing software that does not work,
and
> then relying on its user base instead of dedicated employees to identify
the
> problems, they will have a severe problem with the fixes lagging well
behind
> when the fixes are needed. They are relying on folks who a)have tons of
> confidence in their skills in the software (what sized group is that?) to
> b)identify and isolate the issues (what sized group is that?) that will c)
> to catalog problems and take time away from paying work (what sized group
is
> that?) to d)report bugs that their experience might tell them will take
> months or years to address. I for one pass all the tests, and am trying
> really hard, but man, I am still having trouble justifying hours and hours
> and hours of bug reporting where I should instead be working, or going
home
> to be with my wife. I know so many others who don't even bother, or who
> think the problems are their fault (and assume that the software's
> deficiency is their own).
>
> I just want to make it clear that it is not the users fault that SW does
not
> work. I don't want any SW employee to think that it is just a bunch of
> whiners or agitators who are making noise and rattling sabers for some
weird
> purposes. I don't even want this to be about enhancement requests....
> hell, I don't want even one new feature until all of the existing issue
have
> been resolved! Even if it takes two years .... I don't care!
> I have helped, have offered to help, and will continue to offer to help to
> do anything that will fix this unfortunate and unnecessary state of
affairs.
> All I can say is that up until this release I have been an enthusiastic
and
> active supporter of SW. now... well, I am just feeling sad
>
> Edward Eaton