More Service Pack 2.1 Problems

After many hours of downloading, I was finally greeted with this message...

formatting link
SolidWorks actually changed the file as I was half-way through downloading it.

Now we have 2.1 OLD and 2.1 NEW.

So if anyone is on dial-up trying to get this latest Service Pack, don't be surprised if your file fails.

Does anyone else think SW should have changed the rev to 2.2? I know this is a bizarre case, but yet it happened didn't it? I guess it's damned if you doo situation.

Mike Wilson

Reply to
Mike J. Wilson
Loading thread data ...

Darn, Mike, are you trying to help or make sense of this?? Hmm,..

2.1a 2.11 2.101 2.1hollysh@! 2.1_the_latest_1 .. .

8^)

"Mike J. Wils>

Reply to
Paul Salvador

I think it's those crazy Martians again. They like to make life difficult sometimes...

formatting link

Reply to
Mike J. Wilson

Mike,

Get rid of the 2.1 that you have now and download again. You shouldn't have the same problem.

Apparently what SW did is remove debugging information from the 2.1 upgrade. You were unfortunate enough to be downloading when they changed files. The removal of the debugging information is supposed to speed up install times.

So yes there is now a 2.1a and 2.1b, both functi> After many hours of downloading, I was finally greeted

Reply to
kellnerp

"Mike J. Wilson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1355ad45ddc6658ad1517cbe6dcb07b8@news.1usenet.com...

Yes, I personally think you are right and SolidWorks should have called the new SP 2.2 according to their own policies.

They changed the file, and this is enough to have to change the servicepack version number.

I can hear the bitching between VARs and their customers about the time the SP 2.1 update takes:

VAR: "What SP do you have?" CUS: "The most recent one, 2.1" VAR: "Yeah, but WHICH 2.1?" CUS: "??????????"

Mike, you are not alone, but at least I download the SPs in about 45 minutes SCNR :-))

Bye, Stefan

Reply to
Stefan Berlitz

6 minutes using cable, the only way to go :)
Reply to
kenneth b

unless everyone on the block is d/l-ing it at the same time.

in which case, change that to 6 weeks. ;)

--nick e.

Reply to
Nick E.

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.