SolidWorks 2001Plus Service Pack SP1.0 Available for Download
SolidWorks Corp.
from the Subscription Services Web Site.
http://www.solidworks.com/swdocs/Support/Subscription/html/
Regards,
_____________________________________
SolidWorks Corporation
Join us at SolidWorks World Feb. 17-20th, 2002
www.solidworks.com/solidworksworld
David Murray
Should help keep regressions to a lower level, considering the frequency
of major SP releases (insert back patting here).
Regards,
Dave Murray
~~~~~~~~~~~
wgates666
Newsg...@solidworks.com says...
SO, HOW exactly does one install this thing?
i download & installed 2001+.
i d/led the windos installer SP file. ran swspmanager.exe, and am being
told that it can't upgrade because the program being upgraded may be
missing, and that there's no log file available. Value returned: 1642
uh.....For that matter, where did SP1.0 go?
just checked the website and it's gone.
did i really just waste my time downloading the damn thing?
--john
wgates666
says...
> I like what SW is doing with the service pack download area. Good idea.
> Should help keep regressions to a lower level, considering the frequency
> of major SP releases (insert back patting here).
>
> Regards,
> Dave Murray
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
>
you might want to rethink that.
it's already been taken down.
--john
Paul Salvador
..
David Murray
That sure as heck didn't take long. How long was the
Service Pack up there? A couple hours, maybe? So I'll
ask the question ..
Somebody does actually test these service packs before
they go up on the web site, right?
Right?
RIGHT???
wgates666
says...
> Ok, where is it at? Or are we going to see SP1.1 later today?
>
SP1.0 had a major mate problem, so it was pulled. Strait from the var's
mouth.
No word on when 1.1 comes out.
--john
wgates666
says...
> In the words of the alligator hunter, "crikey"!
>
> That sure as heck didn't take long. How long was the
> Service Pack up there? A couple hours, maybe? So I'll
> ask the question ..
>
> Somebody does actually test these service packs before
> they go up on the web site, right?
>
> Right?
>
>
> RIGHT???
um.....yeah.....sure.
would you care to buy a bridge?
--john
Devon T. Sowell
Does SolidWorks test Service Packs before they are released?
If so, what is the method of testing?
Thank you,
Devon T. Sowell
Jacob Filek
WOW!!!
"SolidWorks Corp." <Newsg...@solidworks.com> wrote in message
news:d02bd9a3.02012...@posting.google.com...
Richard M
Silly me, I thought they were going to *test* the service packs this time. At least I don't have to re-install 9 SP's to get back
to current minus 1.
Richard M
____________________________
Dan Hanger
another problem I was having. Now it seems that when I edit a part in context of
an assembly, the rollback bar is unavailable. Can anyone else who installed it
confirm that? If so, I hope SW knows about it and fixes that (they know about it
know, I guess).
--
Dan Hanger
Eagle Mold Technologies
858-530-0888
"David Murray" <da...@cadimensions.com> wrote in message
news:3C4DCE1E...@cadimensions.com...
Evadem
just to find out that this SP is SO BAD they remove it from the website.
AAAAAAAAAAAAARGH. Just when I had faith that they were getting better at
releasing SP's that weren't junk, they release the worst one ever. Time to
revert back to SP0. It is also so nice to have SW post that the new SP is
available for download so fools like me can install it. The funny thing is,
is that this is the first time I have downloaded and installed a SP right
away, usually I wait and let other people beta test it for them. So much for
their new and improved method for releasing SP's.
Dave
wgates666
says...
> Like an idiot, I downloaded and installled it right away, hoping it would fix
> another problem I was having. Now it seems that when I edit a part in context of
> an assembly, the rollback bar is unavailable. Can anyone else who installed it
> confirm that? If so, I hope SW knows about it and fixes that (they know about it
> know, I guess).
>
contact your var to make sure.
might as well get as many fixes as possible for SP1.1.
This is so ridiculus it's not even funny any more.
And another thing, where the fsck is our resident newsgroup guy from SW?
why was there no announcement/notification of this from SW officially
here? what's the point of having SW on this newsgroup if they don't tell
us anything?
Ticked off again,
john
Flipper
I think you should let us publish this kind of note on the newsgroup.
At least we would try loading an assembly before we trumpet....
and this could save the thin SW image.
We're kinda fast on these event anyways!
Dom
Flipper
floating around. :P
oh good point! why no warning of this new space feature?
D
Sporkman
'Sporky'
-----------------------
"SolidWorks Corp." wrote:
>
> SolidWorks 2001Plus Service Pack SP1.0 is now available for download
> from the Subscription Services Web Site.
>
> http://www.solidworks.com/swdocs/Support/Subscription/html/
>
> Regards,
> SolidWorks Corporation
Paul Salvador
problem with SP1.0 and it was pulled and another SP will be released
shortly.
If you guys are interested in participation and pr, do it right!
..
Evadem
"Paul Salvador" <p.sal...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3C4DFD29...@verizon.net...
> If you're going to be posting, please follow up on saying there was a
> problem with SP1.0 and it was pulled and another SP will be released
> shortly.
>
but I still haven't seen a post saying that it had major problems and they
have pulled it. Not a good way to start their new and "improved" SP release
system.
Dave
Joe Dunne
SP1.0 was initially posted to our web site at ~11 AM EST today (Tues 22nd Jan). Unfortunately, a very generic problem was discovered with assembly mates, whereby they were being overridden on dragging components, even full defined ones. Conversely, fully-defined components whose mates were created prior to SP1.0 remained fully defined even if mates were suppressed / deleted. This has been submitted as a Problem Report to the Development Group โ SPR #122647. Fixing this ASAP is obviously a top priority.
Joe Dunne
SolidWorks
ย
ย
Jason Capriotti
> mouth.
I've seen this in 1.0. Not on everything though.
Jason Capriotti
"SolidWorks Corp." <Newsg...@solidworks.com> wrote in message
news:d02bd9a3.02012...@posting.google.com...
Mark Robirds
My VAR delivered my copy about a month ago, but this time I'm sticking to my
guns and will wait until at least SP5.0 is out. When that time comes and I
can read through this newsgroup without hearing about a multitude of bugs,
I'll consider installing it.
After the last 3 releases of thier betas, I have learned my lesson and will
not waste my time with reinstalls of whichever SP is the lesser of the
evils. I'm paid to design products for my company, not troubleshoot
software. Since they seem to average 10 or so SP's per release I figure 5.0
might be the point at which they might have it half right.
From the SW web site-
"Major Service Packs will be released at approximately 5 week intervals and
contain a relatively large number of fixes. Minor Service Packs will be
released only on an as-needed basis to fix any very critical problems
discovered in a Major Service Pack that SolidWorks determines cannot wait
until the next Major Service Pack."
Just a thought.....If I were the owner of a software company I would at
least put forth the image that I was confident in my software, so as not to
put off my customers. To me making a comment like this just says that "yeah
we know ahead of time that we are going to dump an unfinished, bug-filled
program on our paying customers, but fuck them, we got to keep up with the
market."
If I bought some $100 CAD program and it was full of bugs, I would expect
it, and shame on me. But for $4000 (and more than that in maintenance fees
so far) and I have to spend my time pulling my hair out dealing with
problems as deadlines approach. Well then it's shame on you SW.
"Jacob Filek" <jacobs...@cybertime.net> wrote in message
news:a2kkr4$1kbg$1...@madmax.keyway.net...
Kevin Silbert
happened is the first priority, I would disagree. Priorities:
1) Yank the release to limit the damage
2) Fix the release ASAP
3) Explain what happened when you get time
If you think this order on this is messed up, so be it, but at least
they could do #1 quickly to limit the damage. Even getting #3 done
the same day is amazing compared to any other system I've ever seen...
much less #1... and the speed that #2 will get done will also suprise
many.
-Kevin
"Joe Dunne" <jdu...@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:ITq38.20655$hp6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
To all,
SP1.0 was initially posted to our web site at ~11 AM EST today (Tues
22nd Jan). Unfortunately, a very generic problem was discovered with
assembly mates, whereby they were being overridden on dragging
components, even full defined ones. Conversely, fully-defined
components whose mates were created prior to SP1.0 remained fully
defined even if mates were suppressed / deleted. This has been
submitted as a Problem Report to the Development Group - SPR #122647.
Fixing this ASAP is obviously a top priority.
Joe Dunne
SolidWorks
"Evadem" <att.net@davemerri> wrote in message
news:sSn38.316685$WW.14...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Paul Salvador" <p.sal...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:3C4DFD29...@verizon.net...
> > If you're going to be posting, please follow up on saying there
was a
> > problem with SP1.0 and it was pulled and another SP will be
released
> > shortly.
> >
> I couldn't agree with you more. They were very fast posting it was
available
> but I still haven't seen a post saying that it had major problems
and they
> have pulled it. Not a good way to start their new and "improved" SP
release
> system.
>
> Dave
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02
Matt Bertsch
Anyone selling tickets for the clue bus??!??!??
Matt Bertsch
"Joe Dunne" <jdu...@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message news:<ITq38.20655$hp6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...
> To all,
> SP1.0 was initially posted to our web site at ~11 AM EST today (Tues
> 22nd Jan). Unfortunately, a very generic problem was discovered with
> assembly mates, whereby they were being overridden on dragging
> components, even full defined ones. Conversely, fully-defined components
> whose mates were created prior to SP1.0 remained fully defined even if
> mates were suppressed / deleted. This has been submitted as a Problem
> Report to the Development Group - SPR #122647. Fixing this ASAP is
> obviously a top priority.
>
> Joe Dunne
>
> SolidWorks
>
>
>
>
>
> "Evadem" <att.net@davemerri> wrote in message
> news:sSn38.316685$WW.14...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > "Paul Salvador" <p.sal...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> > news:3C4DFD29...@verizon.net...
> > > If you're going to be posting, please follow up on saying there was
> a
> > > problem with SP1.0 and it was pulled and another SP will be released
> > > shortly.
> > >
> > I couldn't agree with you more. They were very fast posting it was
> available
> > but I still haven't seen a post saying that it had major problems and
> they
> > have pulled it. Not a good way to start their new and "improved" SP
> release
> > system.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
>
> --
Flipper
It was mostly a big mind binding game to decide:
"how SW corp will show up in public about this rather big error"?
Imagine the poor dude who just got a few seats of SW2k1+,
dreaming of SP1.0 all nights because is staff can hardly work
with SP0.0...and now??
Dom
wgates666
kwsi...@home.com.NOSPAMMAGE says...
> See? There you all go. To anyone who thinks that explaining what
> happened is the first priority, I would disagree. Priorities:
> 1) Yank the release to limit the damage
> 2) Fix the release ASAP
> 3) Explain what happened when you get time
>
> If you think this order on this is messed up, so be it, but at least
> they could do #1 quickly to limit the damage. Even getting #3 done
> the same day is amazing compared to any other system I've ever seen...
> much less #1... and the speed that #2 will get done will also suprise
> many.
>
> -Kevin
there was a problem. it should have been announced while i was d/ling it
so that i wouldn't install it.
-john
Dave
Before the rest of the group hammers you about your statement I must say
that I agree with you. Well said. I've been involved with CAD/CAM software
for almost 30 years. I can't even begin to name all the software that I've
dealt with on a daily basis over those years. Software development as in
almost everything else runs in up and down cycles. SolidWorks has an
extremely difficult balancing act to deal with. From an overall standpoint
I would say they are probably the best I've ever seen. Of course they should
have tested and not allowed 2001Plus 1.0 to be released. Let's keep in mind
that they put themselves under intense pressure to get SP1.0 out. We all
make mistakes at our jobs, why can't Solidworks. They obviously are in a
very aggressive development mode. Of course we all desire perfect stability
with no bugs in SolidWorks. It just can't happen. When it's all sorted out
I still prefer the aggressive development mode that SolidWorks work in.
Why can't SolidWorks users adopt a stance that says NOT get a service pack
the minute it comes out unless a bug is being fixed in the service pack that
stops them from getting their job done. I find it hard to believe that most
users can't wait days or even weeks until they get the latest service pack.
Dave Johnson
"Kevin Silbert" <kwsi...@home.com.NOSPAMMAGE> wrote in message
news:Jnx38.11628$067.4...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
wgates666
says...
> Kevin,
>
> Before the rest of the group hammers you about your statement I must say
> that I agree with you. Well said. I've been involved with CAD/CAM software
> for almost 30 years. I can't even begin to name all the software that I've
> dealt with on a daily basis over those years. Software development as in
> almost everything else runs in up and down cycles. SolidWorks has an
> extremely difficult balancing act to deal with. From an overall standpoint
> I would say they are probably the best I've ever seen. Of course they should
> have tested and not allowed 2001Plus 1.0 to be released. Let's keep in mind
> that they put themselves under intense pressure to get SP1.0 out. We all
> make mistakes at our jobs, why can't Solidworks. They obviously are in a
> very aggressive development mode. Of course we all desire perfect stability
> with no bugs in SolidWorks. It just can't happen. When it's all sorted out
> I still prefer the aggressive development mode that SolidWorks work in.
>
> Why can't SolidWorks users adopt a stance that says NOT get a service pack
> the minute it comes out unless a bug is being fixed in the service pack that
> stops them from getting their job done. I find it hard to believe that most
> users can't wait days or even weeks until they get the latest service pack.
uh, because there ARE bugs (supposedly) being fixed in SP1.0 that many
of us need fixed?
the way dimensions appear when doing an offset from surface cut for
instance. Or the open drawing->open part->edit sketch and regen->drawing
is in perpetual roll-back state. there's several good-sized bugs that
were being fixed in sp1.0.
as far as the "aggressive development mode", i think most of us here are
in production environments. we need stable software. not necessarily
cutting edge.
--john
bill
the VAR's selling?
thanks
bill
"Matt Bertsch" <mber...@hydro-thermal.com> wrote in message
news:3c1814b3.02012...@posting.google.com...
Sporkman
bill
if I hadn't committed too soon last year and upgraded too many models, I
wish I had remained
on SW2000sp10, actually.
"Sporkman" <MUNGEspor...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3C4EF2F5...@bigfoot.com...
Paul Salvador
1) Yank the release to limit the damage
2) Explain what happened when you get time
3) Fix the release ASAP
..
Evadem
happened I agree with Paul on the order but #1 should be amended with
"> 1) Yank the release to limit the damage. Post a warning "DO NOT INSTALL
SP1, IT HAS BEEN REMOVED OUR WEBSITE"
Yes they should have SHOUTED it out in this ng. This would have lessened
the damage even more. How much time would it have taken for one person to
post this ten word warning here, seconds? They had the time and one employee
could have very easily posted the message while they yanked it from the
website. Then they could have proceeded with steps 2 & 3.
> 2) Explain what happened when you get time
A why would have been nice too.
> 3) Fix the release ASAP
Dave
Jason Capriotti
its gone. That's a good indication that something was wrong.
"Evadem" <att.net@davemerri> wrote in message
news:4SK38.419121$W8.14...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Ryan Hay- Solid Design Systems Inc.
They need to put changes in place. I am actually starting to think maybe I
my company needs another CAD package other than SW. Shit when you put out a
SP and yank it hours later, okay maybe things happen like this once in a
while. But since 2000 SP's and stability have been huge issues. Management
really needs to address these issues and make the appropriate changes fast.
Customers will start looking at other software packages, if they read this
board they may not even buy SW or even eval. at it at all
I really hope SW reads this board, our at least decision makers at SW need
to, maybe there eyes will open a little wider.
another disappointed SW user. still running 2001
--
Ryan Hay
Solid Design Systems Inc.
Phone 1 (519) 886-8362
Fax 1 (519) 886-3690
http://www.SOLIDESIGN.com
"Jason Capriotti" <gildashard...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:PLq38.95594$t07.13...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
Dale Dunn
Jason Capriotti wrote:
> I think we got the word our fast ourselves....someone said its there, now
> its gone. That's a good indication that something was wrong.
>
Right. So Greg's presence, while very welcome, has not yet added much to
this newsgroup. I hope they learn a lesson. Sp1.0 should have been
retracted immediately in every forum from which it was announced, the
very instant hey decided that it needed to be pulled. An email through
the existing channels would have been even better, since most people
check that more often. The first thought should have been (and I believe
was) to protect as many paying customers as possible. I suspect it
just wasn't thought through, like so many other things.
--
Dale Dunn
Design Engineer
www.jamestool.com
513-942-6077
whit
I've been watching the NG's to try to get a feel for user sentiment.
They both have shortcomings, they both have strengths. We're an ACAD
user, MDT since R1, pretty tired of the ACAD way of doing business, hell
they can't even keep their NG server working.
The first message was ~10AM, the first post indicating it was *not* on
the web site came ~1PM, the *first* message from a SW employee came
~10PM from what appears to be his *home* email address.
Perhaps Joe had just gotten home, decided to check the NG and discovered
that *nobody* from work had notified us/you. Either way it is a SHAME
that 12 hours passed without a word from SW. Kinda tells me their
customers are not their primary concern.
2ยข
Whit
Dale Dunn wrote:
> Right. So Greg's presence, while very welcome, has not yet added much to
> this newsgroup. I hope they learn a lesson. Sp1.0 should have been
> retracted immediately in every forum from which it was announced, the
> very instant hey decided that it needed to be pulled.<snip>
Joe Dunne
news:scV38.2$yb4.130...@news.onr.com...
> Perhaps Joe had just gotten home, decided to check the NG and discovered
> that *nobody* from work had notified us/you. Either way it is a SHAME
> that 12 hours passed without a word from SW. Kinda tells me their
> customers are not their primary concern.
Whit,
You are correct WRT to how I wound up posting. In fact there is a person
that should have posted an explanation, and notice immediately.
Unfortunately this person was on the road, at a SolidWorks usergroup meeting
that day. So he did not see the posts, until the next day.
Sincerely,
Joe Dunne
Jeff Norfolk
> Kevin,
>
> Before the rest of the group hammers you about your statement I must say
> that I agree with you. Well said. I've been involved with CAD/CAM software
> for almost 30 years. I can't even begin to name all the software that I've
> dealt with on a daily basis over those years. Software development as in
> almost everything else runs in up and down cycles. SolidWorks has an
> extremely difficult balancing act to deal with. From an overall standpoint
> I would say they are probably the best I've ever seen. Of course they should
> have tested and not allowed 2001Plus 1.0 to be released. Let's keep in mind
> that they put themselves under intense pressure to get SP1.0 out. We all
> make mistakes at our jobs, why can't Solidworks.
We accept that they are not perfect, but when SP after SP comes out
all bugged up it gets old and users start losing trust in the product,
the company and its services. How many times can you make a mistake on
your job, especially the same mistake, over and over again before you
get fired?
> They obviously are in a
> very aggressive development mode. Of course we all desire perfect stability
> with no bugs in SolidWorks. It just can't happen. When it's all sorted out
> I still prefer the aggressive development mode that SolidWorks work in.
The majority of CAD program developers are in an aggressive
development mode. It increases with competition each and every day.
Perfect stability and no bugs is next to impossible, but it sure can
be a lot closer to perfection than it has been over the past year.
What the users are asking for is for them to stop adding extra
features (which equals extra code) and start refining the code thats
there (interface consistency, please!). Wouldn't you agree that they
have enough software features to competitively market SolidWorks
2001+? For some reason Marketing doesn't believe that a slogan such as
"SolidWorks: The most stable, bug-free CAD software" would be a good
selling point. Or how about "SolidWorks: Best drawings module among
parametric modelers."...and back those statements up.
>
> Why can't SolidWorks users adopt a stance that says NOT get a service pack
> the minute it comes out unless a bug is being fixed in the service pack that
> stops them from getting their job done. I find it hard to believe that most
> users can't wait days or even weeks until they get the latest service pack.
>
> Dave Johnson
The reason it was pulled was because a user discovered it. So why
wait? If everyone waited, no one would discover the problem with the
SP until weeks later, when they installed it. So why not just uncover
the problem ASAP? Or better yet, why not trust that the software
company is publishing quality tested service packs. Why aren't they
discovering these primary function failures of SolidWorks internally?
Do they not have the resources and have to send it out to the users to
do for free?
The front end of SolidWorks development (R&D) is very strong and
impressive. But the back end (service packs, quality assurance,
reliability, enhancement request recognition) is weak. Don't get me
wrong. SolidWorks is my favorite CAD software to work with, but they
need to improve and the only way they are going to see it is if we
(the users) shout loud enough. Though I can't guarantee that will make
a definate difference either.
-Jeff
Jason Capriotti
news:PLq38.95594$t07.13...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
this?
This has been fixed in sp1.1. It wasn't deleted actually but rather when the
note was copied, the copy would go to the next layer in the list which in
our case, was turned off.
I would like to thank Ian Baxter from Solidworks who too the time to
contacted me in regards to this problem and notifiy me that it was in fact
fixed in sp1.1.
Jason Capriotti
ThyssenKrupp Elevator