Does anyone actually use this...[RANT]

We have been running proe since 1998. We were running 2000i^2 for the last 3 years with fair results. Last February we upgraded(?) to 2001

2003010 to find that we suddenly can't 'Instantiate' from our pro/Program parts. I found a work-around by loading the NC module (which must bring in pro/Program functionality) and releasing it after running the program. Over the last couple of weeks I decided to clean up some of our pending PTC issues and I logged a call about the lost functionality. The PTC techs couldn't get 'Instantiate' to work either even on the newest builds. They issued an SPR an said hopefully it will be implemented soon. I was amazed. How can such a large bug go unnoticed for over 8 months. Are we they only company using Pro/Program or at least 'Instantiate'

Issue 2 [Rant continued] Over 2 years ago we purchased pile of ProductView licenses because of all the great features that were promised. We have yet to see a complete working installation. The best I've done is to get 95% of drawings to publish only to upgrade(?) to the newest release to fix the 5% that don't publish and introduce a new 14% of files that don't publish and a pile of other problems. Text and arrows won't publish as filled as they should -- this basically makes every schematic that is included on a drawing worthless because believe it or not PTC there is a difference between a filled arrow and an unfilled one in a schematic. So I log a call, and this is the first they have heard of this problem. They try an publish on there end and the same thing happens. They put in a featue request and give me an SPR.

I have such a hard time believing that we are the only company to come across these issues. Does everyone else find there own work-arounds and not log calls or is nobody actually using these features.

Reply to
Marc A. Ohmann
Loading thread data ...


Some of the bugs I have found are truly amazing; but they do get fixed if you follow through and get an SPR. This requires a little digging and being able to consistently reproduce the issue, document it (reasonably) well, and upload the files you tested to the PTC site. We are using 2001 and have been since it was first released.

Here a couple of statistics that will open your eyes: Since May 1,

2002 my record with PTC Tech Support stands at:

Technical Support Calls logged: 321 SPRs created for issues I discovered: 92

Of the 92 SPRs, perhaps a third are what I would term 'show stoppers'. The balance were more annoyances or could be worked around. The good news is that there are perhaps 15 on the list to be addressed, and they do get fixed (eventually). It is a bit of a double-edged sword, since almost every datecode has a few fixes that I need, so I always have the latest build running. Of course, being on the edge of that sword means that I am right out in front in finding new problems specific to the latest datecode.

Regards Peter Brown

Reply to

I am still kicking myself for allowing PTC to sell us that PILE OF DOGSH*T called ProductView.

Has PTC ever heard of VoloView, AutoVue or E-drawings?

I stopped paying maintenance on Pview, because like all of PTC's products except Windchill, it is a bastard child that gets no real funding to improve it. Band-aids just don't cut it.

70 out of 400 of our DRW's will not publish with version 6.4. No matter what I do, or what PTC "tech support" does they fail to publish. PTC has to invest some the high maintenance dollars back into the MCAD product group.

Don't get me started on Intralink and family tables.

Marc, You are not the only one frustrated with Product View, but I am too hoarse to complain any more.

Reply to
Jon Smallberries


Have been pulling my hear out over ProductView for some time now and i know how frustrating it can get, anyways..

The filling of arrows is Pro/E drawings is not an issue when publishing but rather an issue of the hpgl (plt) format and viewer, you can get filled arrows in the ProductView Client by selecting Preferences->Drawing Settings and check the Fill Polygons check box.

Hope this helps.


Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.