Quality of Software - Survey

I've been involved in a discussion for some time with some people at the executive level with SolidWorks. We don't see eye to eye on what I
perceive as ongoing issues with SolidWorks. The executive in question does not feel that my concerns are representative of mainstream machinery designers using SolidWorks and said to me "the preponderance of customers are extremely satisfied with the level of quality of software and service provided by SolidWorks"
Now I'm wondering how it's possible that I'm one of a few that feels that SolidWorks software and service quality is poor. The software speaks for itself. The support service, although usually prompt, rarely actually results in a bug being addressed. In fact there are problems with SolidWorks that have persisted for the 10 years that I've been using the software.
So, I'm looking for some comments to see who agrees or disagrees with the statement "the preponderance of customers are extremely satisfied with the level of quality of software and service provided by SolidWorks".
TIA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What points in particular do you disagree on?
Service sucks, as it does for all software. I've never had a problem that SW support could solve.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The discussion started after upgrading to SW 2008 where I discovered that it's not only slower but buggier and crashes more. From there my rants have included the failure of SolidWorks to address some bugs that have existed for years, lack of true functionality in Weldments (steel profiles missing, inability to resolve weld beads around irregular forms, no means of accomodating material cut size gaps, etc. etc.) Inability of SolidWorks to add to the Toolbox (it's been unchanged in eons), missing standard threads in Hole Wiz (UNEF, Buttress thread callouts, ACME etc.) Ongoing "Failed to Save" issues. Plate steel shape thickness changing arbitrarily in SW 2008, display issues I did not have before, The usual ongoing beefs from ages ago, no parametric link between a view label and it's scale for example. I could go on and on and have. The official SW response is that SW rocks and I'm on the fringe of users if I'm having this many problems.
It bugs the hell out of me that they add crap like the crinkly paper effect in SW 2008 and spend money on iPods for everyone at SW world but can't be bothered to add UNEF threads to the hole wiz or update the weldment profiles. It's clear where there priorities lie.
I myself have never had a true bug solved by SW, I get SPR numbers though which are real handy for nothing!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My biggest gripe lately is how SW boogered up the search path sequence for finding components. Used to be (pre-2006) that SW went through each folder in the search path list before wandering off elsewhere. NOW SW looks in the first folder, wanders all over the place before getting to the #2 folder in the list. This makes it more likely that SW will find the WRONG version of a file.
I do work for a lot of small companies that need to make do without PDM. A sound search structure is vital for this to happen. All but impossible now.
I'm surprised more people aren't complaining about this.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 13, 11:41 am, snipped-for-privacy@semmlerclan.com wrote:

That's pretty much my biggest complaint. I'm using 08 on an Alienware computer with Vista. It's the first time I've tried to use SW with Vista. Yes it works. And yes, it randomly just closes/crashes out of nowhere at least once every time I use it. It's really not that big a problem for me, I just save more often. But there's just something unsatisfying about having a brand new high power computer, brand new OS, and a brand new software release, that combine to make a package that is slower, takes longer to load, and crashes more often than anything that came before it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ditto.
2001 never crashed on me without warning. 2004 waas much faster than this bloated pig.
Just locked up SW2008 again last night (had to close with task manager) because I selected Photoworks Studio while having an assy open. I can't use Command Manager because of the graphiics bug for 64 bit users and eagerly await the multitude of yet to be experienced bugs. The crinkly effect paper crap is an excellent example of what's wrong with the currrent SW mentality.
wrote:

The discussion started after upgrading to SW 2008 where I discovered that it's not only slower but buggier and crashes more. From there my rants have included the failure of SolidWorks to address some bugs that have existed for years, lack of true functionality in Weldments (steel profiles missing, inability to resolve weld beads around irregular forms, no means of accomodating material cut size gaps, etc. etc.) Inability of SolidWorks to add to the Toolbox (it's been unchanged in eons), missing standard threads in Hole Wiz (UNEF, Buttress thread callouts, ACME etc.) Ongoing "Failed to Save" issues. Plate steel shape thickness changing arbitrarily in SW 2008, display issues I did not have before, The usual ongoing beefs from ages ago, no parametric link between a view label and it's scale for example. I could go on and on and have. The official SW response is that SW rocks and I'm on the fringe of users if I'm having this many problems.
It bugs the hell out of me that they add crap like the crinkly paper effect in SW 2008 and spend money on iPods for everyone at SW world but can't be bothered to add UNEF threads to the hole wiz or update the weldment profiles. It's clear where there priorities lie.
I myself have never had a true bug solved by SW, I get SPR numbers though which are real handy for nothing!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am also one of the dis-satisfied CAD managers along with 10 users. Your case may be similar as we are now pushing the software beyond its initial capabilities. This really has to do with SolidWorks target customers. In my case, we are not them (sounds like you are there beside me). Due to lack of acceptable support i have been looking at other software and up-front giving them a needs and wants listing. i am willing to share mine if you would like. In the CAD review i have 2 mid range cost survivors (wildfire base $5K and Inventor base $5K) and 2 higher cost survivors (Catia base $12K and NX base $12K). All of these go up from there but i am amazed on the Wildfire cost breakdown as it stands today, their high end is about $12K for everything, and the product looks very good and capable. I hate to think that we will have to go through training cycles again but we have to be productive with our tool. The quality of our current tool is less than likeable in many areas and as i see newer releases i cringe on what will not work this time. I am getting closer to a change over, probably around mid year, this year. iQ
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We are also looking at switching and the two packages that are being considered are Pro/E and Wildfire. A previousl employer of mine that was a larger SolidWorks customer migrated to Pro/E. I'd be interested in discussing this further with you if possible. Drop me a line at devlin at terramax machine (all one word) dot com.
Thanks
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 13, 12:43pm, snipped-for-privacy@semmlerclan.com wrote:

I meant to say Pro/E and Inventor.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
At General CADD. we strive to give the end user 1 day customer service often creating new versions, fixing bugs and adding features within days of the initial customer request. If your needs are 2-D you might give General CADD Pro a look over. www.generalcadd.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:03:19 -0800 (PST), snipped-for-privacy@semmlerclan.com wrote:

The old "Silent" majority vs. "Vocal" minority argument....LOL.
I would not classify myself in the "extremely satisfied" group. Over all I am happy with the performance of SolidWorks, it does what I need and reacts how I expect (not many surprises).
There is room for improvement as is the case with any product. I work with large assemblies so "I" would not choose SolidWorks as my preferred CAD software however SolidWorks is the product we have and it works.
There are two reasons "I" would choose not to purchase SolidWorks:
1) Working primarily with Large Assemblies 2) Backwards and forward compatibility
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:26:43 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

Unlike you Jon, I use the software on a daily basis in a production environment. Since you are a beginner Jon I expect you to have problems and encounter issues that I am long past.
All you do Jon is pose as an expert, parrot what you read, post your crib notes, copy and paste advertisements, buzzwords from others. I haven't seen you post original content so if you're having specific problems or issues post them to this group and ask for help.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:18:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
You lost?

Some SOB (Son Of Boss) who never had a real job other than working for his dad, no experience, no education in CAD or CAM or CAD/CAM that bought into your clueless line of BS.
I have never seen middle ground with SOB's, they are great or terrible. Great SOB's are trained well, from the ground up, education and work experience. Or they are like your's, given everything and earned nothing, an absolute disaster, no training, education or talent. The one that hired you will most likely bankrupt the company if left alone and not closely supervised by his dad.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:18:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

LOL...........
Please post specific examples to support your claim.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:18 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

Jon,
Another Banquerism, you make wild accusations then when called on to post examples or source material for your claims can't/won't because you made it up.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:15:07 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

No Jon, its a forgery, that makes YOU the lying scumbag.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:18 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

What lies Jon?
How can I answer when you won't specify what you're talking about?
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:18 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

If you are sincere & post specific problems you are having an experienced user will help you, they help beginners all the time.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where do I work? Who do I work for? I pretend that I know what I do but my enployer soon discover the truth and I am again out the door, do, Brewer. Cliff Huprich also has shown repeatedly that all I can do is lie. Most of the time I am unemployed. I wouldn't dare reveal either my present or past employers (and there have been many).

Brewer, I'm no expert at SolidWorks. My help is often so bad that posters I tried to help e-mailed you because I couldn't explain the simplest concept without confusing them. My comments on SolidWorks have never been published by anyone because I simply have nothing of value / worthwhile to say. Does "being published" mean leaving my comments on a blog? (I think it does.)
Irrelevant:
"Jon, I never forgot any of your postings about SDRC I made the wrong decision in spite of what you said. There have been a number of times that my Wife has told me to be careful in dealing with someone and after words says "I told you so". She earned the right to say it as well as you have earned the right to say I TOLD YOU SO. I made a decision that went against my better judgment and as usual it turned out poorly." ... a Tom Brewer statement from years ago (but I pretend it is relevent).
Irrelevant:
"I do not purchase programs unless I know before hand that they are what I want and/or need."... Tom Brewer follows his own advice. See above.
Intelligent:
Tom Brewer knowing he and his pals like Joe788 can show that I lie on a repeated basis and suffer no consequences for doing so.
Irrelevant:
"I have shot myself in the foot, not an easy thing to do when it is in your mouth and your head is in your ass."... Tom Brewer admitting that once, many years ago, he made a mistake. (His only real mistake was admitting it to me.)
Intelligent:
Someone who has a proven track record of being able to deal with or accept the kind of change that occurs in the cadcam market... now that's intelligent or should we say that's Tom Brewer.
Intelligent:
Someone who doesn't live in San Diego yet knows there is no shortage of CNC machinists here... now that's intelligent or should we say that's Tom Brewer.
Intelligent:
Someone who criticizes me on SolidWorks but has helped everyone else with specific SolidWorks answers. Someone who is able to answer any questions that "Vinny" had on master modeling or skeletal modeling but chose not to. Someone who has not posted models they have done because there was no need to... now that's intelligent or should we say that's Tom Brewer.
Intelligent:
Tom Brewer understands who Matt Lombard really is. I don't.
Intelligent:
Tom Brewer's able to comprehend what's on the cover of the SolidWorks Bible:
"Whether you're a new, intermediate, ...."
Intelligent:
Someone who understands that more than a simple "I love it!" or "I hate it!" type of comment is not always necessary ... now that's intelligent or should we say that's Tom Brewer.
Intelligent:
Tom Brewer implies that because I didn't know that the $25 SolidWorks course covers subjects / topics that the $650 SolidWorks course did that now somehow I am an idiot and got screwed when I decided to purchase the $650 SolidWorks course. He would be right again.
Tom Brewer Writing About SmartCAM:
"I ended up paying a consultant $40.00 per hour for two weeks. It turned out to be a very economical way of getting one-on-one training."
"FYI, when I said "Solid modeling" in reference to SmartCam it was tongue in cheek. What you could not see is that when I was typing that I was laughing to myself. Anyone that uses SmartCam and Solid Modeling in the same sentence cannot be taken seriously."
Recently Tom Brewer said SmartCAM had no serious interface problems yet the record shows Tom Brewer knows SmartCAM does indeed have some interface problems:
"The only real problem that I run into is that the screen can get cluttered and it becomes difficult to pick and choose elements in Free Form. I just use the utility masking feature to hide what is in the way, that cures the problem but it does add work (I tried the snap filtering and snap options but for me it was not the best way), I have seen other packages that handle picking and choosing in better."
Conclusion:
Tom Brewer knows he's proficient with SolidWorks. A proficient SolidWorks user is someone who shows that I know very little about Solidworks (and almost nothing about everything else).
Jon Banquer San Diego, CA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:18:58 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com Topdownbydesign OS Noir Frank Booth, jr dominantjon Mr.X jbtech Clinton Upyers Haywood Jablowme Normand Blais     snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com     snipped-for-privacy@connix.com     jon banquer snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com      snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com Brian Winters Johnny Stevenson Joe789 J0e788 Former Heavy Industries Employee, donl517 James Jessup snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Troll Killer
Jon,
Which one of your personalities didn't understand?
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.