Inventor General

Reply
Active Contributor
flash
Posts: 45
Registered: ‎09-11-2003
Message 21 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 08:53 AM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
Jeff,

Many of the 600 or so issues being addressed are a result of the beta testing NOT from the rants of this NG! Beta testing went on for roughly 6 weeks with at least 2 beta builds and many more through the ADN program that were tested. Many of the issues that are listed in this NG, as I said were reported up until testing closed. There was not enough time to make all the changes reported privately in the shipped product. With all the enhancements and changes made in R6 there bound to be inconsistancies and flaws in the final product. This release is the most top to bottom change to the product since its initial release (R1). When was the last time any new product was released with a problem? Never!! If a company spent all its time internally trying to find "challenges" with its own product, it theoretically would never be released to the public. Meanwhile drying up potential revenues. I digress...... Besides, any product has potential to cause problems (ex: Firestone, Graco (baby car seats), any make of automobile). Isn't it human nature to "try" something out first before jumping in without a thought? Who backed up there data before jumping into R6? If you buy a new car or upgrade to another model don't most people test drive it first? Check the brakes (eerrrtt!), stop light to light acceleration, see how long the burnouts can get, and last but not least hit a couple of pot holes to see how the suspension feels. Don't tell me nobody does any of this.... Basically you want to get an idea of what your getting into BEFORE you get it. If nobody tested R6 on a full fledged set of data for the functions and features that you use everyday then you have nobody to blame but yourself.
*Howard, Jeff
Message 22 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 11:40 AM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
So you are saying this is just business as usual?

================================

"flash" wrote in message
news:f11eaa7.19@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
Jeff,
Many of the 600 or so issues ......
Active Contributor
flash
Posts: 45
Registered: ‎09-11-2003
Message 23 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 01:06 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
Don't take it so bad. I started out addressing it back to you more or less but ended up addressing it as a general statement to all. In todays society its basically preached that somebody else is always at fault. Take the average 6' ladder for instance, the thing should only cost a couple of dollars instead of the 20-30 dollars it costs now. And why is that? Because people fall off it and sue the manufacturer because it (the ladder) allowed them to stand on it the wrong way and fall off. Look in the documentation, I'm sure it states something like "...Autodesk is not resposible for any lost data related to the use of ___ (fill in the blank) software....." and so on. Hence, the often used statment "back up all files prior to use". I'm sorry if I sounded personal, it wasn't meant to be that way. Everybody is looking at Adesk as the scapegoat on this release. They may share some of the responsiblily, but unless a gun was held to peoples head when they installed R6 to work with prior to testing, then they only need to look in the mirror for the scapegoat. :smileyhappy:
*Bogan, Bill
Message 24 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 02:55 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
MCAD TECH FAM is an Autodesk email alias with one
heckuva bunch of names on it.


--
Bill


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

oh and what is
size=3>"MCAD TECH FAM"   ?


--
Sean Dotson, PE

href="http://www.sdotson.com">http://www.sdotson.com

remove all #s from
email
-----------------------------------------


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

That sounds great......but......I certainly
hope general stability, spreadsheet linking, parts list editing etc. is part
of the 200+80+60 fixes that Buzz mentions.  I'm also rather surprised
he didn't mention graphic related bugs as a major point.  That seems to
be a common problem among all (well most) R6 users.

 

Nov.15th...cool!


--
Sean Dotson, PE

href="http://www.sdotson.com">http://www.sdotson.com

remove all #s
from email
-----------------------------------------


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
I
have been reading messages from some disgruntled R6 users (most notably,
the "Silence" thread) about Autodesk not owning up to issues with R6. Read
below the email I received today from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.




All,

I have heard a number of issues from your customers
concerning Inventor 6 quality. Most of these issues have focused on
drawing manager. My team has met with a key members of our technical sales
team and with customers to define the scope of the problem. In response to
this we are producing an Inventor 6 service pack. The service pack will be
available for download on November 15. Code development work for the
service pack is largely completed and it is currently under final test and
being qualified for release. Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire
product have been resolved. I will forward a separate detail list of fixes
to MCAD TECH FAM later this week. Following is a high level summary:



Parts

Around 90 issues have been resolved that deal
specifically with parts, most of the issues are priority 2 and 3. Memory
leaks which lead to capacity issues have been fixed. Issues with features
failing to update which are dependent on loft, thicken and delete face
operations have been fixed. Some key Autodesk Shape Manager fixes have
also been incorporated including fixes for specific fillet and loft
crashes. A bug that limited emboss functionality has been removed.



Assemblies

In assemblies we have resolved around 80
issues, most having to do with constraints. This includes several issues
with transitional constraints and adaptive assemblies. Limitations with
constraining adaptive assemblies to non-adaptive assemblies have been
fixed. Certain iMate fixes have been introduced. In addition, a large set
of special weldment cases has been resolved. Specifically, weld symbols
jumping, failing fillet welds, issues with creating welds have been fixed.



Drawings

Over 200 fixes for the service pack have been
in drawings. Issues related to specific migration problems, holes and hole
tables, and performance and capacity for view creation of very large
assemblies have been fixed. Over 30 crashes have been fixed. Some specific
issues that have been resolved include:

  - Crash
getting all dimensions from a derived part with a pattern.


  - Crash after save when copy/paste a sheet with
projected view.

  - Crash when cursor crosses the
section arrow during section view creation.

  - Crash
annotating to some legacy section views.

  - Annotations
do not stay attached to view geometry on assembly update.


  - Weld annotations not recovered in a specific drawing
view.

  - Assembly demote causes part list numbering to
jump.

  - Drawing cannot be opened after deleting a
component from .ipn’s assembly.

  - Breakout view causes
crosshatch to be wrong.


Other

A relatively small
number of issues have been fixed in Data Exchange, Content Library, API,
Sheet Metal and Surfacing.



Best Regards,


-buzz

*Howard, Jeff
Message 25 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 04:33 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
With a background in general aviation, I'm more than aware of the effects
excesses in legislation / litigation have on consumers and industries and am
not a proponent of either. Thus my regret regarding the statements.

Lost data is not the reason I posed the original question. It was prompted by
what I consider to be broader and more important issues; what I perceive
(possibly not in agreement with others) to be Autodesk's growing contempt for
it's customer base and an almost flagrant disregard for the concept of
quality. But, enough said. In the end the market will indicate whether
Autodesk's software and practices are of value and acceptable regardless of my
perceptions as an individual.

Have a good one,
Jeff
=======================


"flash" wrote in message
news:f11eaa7.23@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
Don't take it so bad. I started out addressing it back to you more or less but
ended up addressing it as a general statement to all. In todays society its
basically preached that somebody else is always at fault. Take the average 6'
ladder for instance, the thing should only cost a couple of dollars instead of
the 20-30 dollars it costs now. And why is that? Because people fall off it
and sue the manufacturer because it (the ladder) allowed them to stand on it
the wrong way and fall off. Look in the documentation, I'm sure it states
something like "...Autodesk is not resposible for any lost data related to the
use of ___ (fill in the blank) software....." and so on. Hence, the often used
statment "back up all files prior to use". I'm sorry if I sounded personal, it
wasn't meant to be that way. Everybody is looking at Adesk as the scapegoat on
this release. They may share some of the responsiblily, but unless a gun was
held to peoples head when they installed R6 to work with prior to testing,
then they only need to look in the mirror for the scapegoat. :smileyhappy:
*Holzwarth, W.
Message 26 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 05:22 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
I've asked this before, but perhaps I've overlooked the answer to my
question. So let me do it again, please:

What's the actual situation for IAMs und IPTs out of IV6 Beta2 in the final
release?
Can they mostly be used further on in IV6 Final?
Do cases exist, where IV6 Beta files refuse to work in the official release?
If there's an overall problem with beta files, where's the reason for it?

At the moment I'm still with IV5.3 and IV6 Beta2 here. But I've done some
not too complex things with Beta2 under production environment, and I don't
want to send it down the Rubicon.

So I'd appreciate an answer here, before my Beta2 expires, which is some
days before Christmas.

Thanks
Walter

Dipl.-Ing. Walter Holzwarth
Ingenieurbuero fuer Maschinenbau
Brombeerweg 23
D-37281 Wanfried
Tel. +49-5655-92144 Fax +49-5655-92145
http://www.holzwarth-cad.de


"Ron Crain" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4F12C20A1A0C7BFBB88637B68264DAEC@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Beta testing is a double edged sword. You never find the critical bugs
> until you use it in a production environment - but - you never use beta in
a
> production environment because the files aren't guaranteed to work with
the
> released code.
>
> "Jeff Howard" wrote in message
> news:C7AEEEC1E42BF7E63F41798E53676781@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Good to hear, but I've got to wonder; how did this happen?
> > How many beta testers were there? A dozen?
> > Or, were all the issues known at shipping time?
> >
> > Jeff
> > ==================
> >
> > "DJSpaceMouse" wrote in message
> > news:f11eaa7.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > ...........
> > ......from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.
> > ......
> > Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire product have been resolved.
> > ......
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
*Caldwell, Larry
Message 27 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 07:49 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
R6 beta files are useless in the released version. The reason, I suspect, is
same reason you can't open 5.3 files in R5. The final release is a newer
program with enough code changes to make it so.
~Larry

"W. Holzwarth" wrote in message
news:FC882E1A06AE3A5C776476003B57AD98@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I've asked this before, but perhaps I've overlooked the answer to my
> question. So let me do it again, please:
>
> What's the actual situation for IAMs und IPTs out of IV6 Beta2 in the
final
> release?
> Can they mostly be used further on in IV6 Final?
> Do cases exist, where IV6 Beta files refuse to work in the official
release?
> If there's an overall problem with beta files, where's the reason for it?
>
> At the moment I'm still with IV5.3 and IV6 Beta2 here. But I've done some
> not too complex things with Beta2 under production environment, and I
don't
> want to send it down the Rubicon.
>
> So I'd appreciate an answer here, before my Beta2 expires, which is some
> days before Christmas.
>
> Thanks
> Walter
>
> Dipl.-Ing. Walter Holzwarth
> Ingenieurbuero fuer Maschinenbau
> Brombeerweg 23
> D-37281 Wanfried
> Tel. +49-5655-92144 Fax +49-5655-92145
> http://www.holzwarth-cad.de
>
>
> "Ron Crain" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:4F12C20A1A0C7BFBB88637B68264DAEC@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Beta testing is a double edged sword. You never find the critical bugs
> > until you use it in a production environment - but - you never use beta
in
> a
> > production environment because the files aren't guaranteed to work with
> the
> > released code.
> >
> > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message
> > news:C7AEEEC1E42BF7E63F41798E53676781@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Good to hear, but I've got to wonder; how did this happen?
> > > How many beta testers were there? A dozen?
> > > Or, were all the issues known at shipping time?
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > > ==================
> > >
> > > "DJSpaceMouse" wrote in message
> > > news:f11eaa7.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > ...........
> > > ......from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.
> > > ......
> > > Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire product have been
resolved.
> > > ......
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
*Caldwell, Larry
Message 28 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 07:57 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
I might add: beta is always a crap-shoot, I guess some would say. Sometimes
beta files will open in the final release. I think R4 beta files would open
in R5 but later, maybe after a SP or something, I would see errors that the
file was created in beta and can't be opened so I wouldn't ever trust beta
files to work and keep working.
~Larry

"W. Holzwarth" wrote in message
news:FC882E1A06AE3A5C776476003B57AD98@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I've asked this before, but perhaps I've overlooked the answer to my
> question. So let me do it again, please:
>
> What's the actual situation for IAMs und IPTs out of IV6 Beta2 in the
final
> release?
> Can they mostly be used further on in IV6 Final?
> Do cases exist, where IV6 Beta files refuse to work in the official
release?
> If there's an overall problem with beta files, where's the reason for it?
>
> At the moment I'm still with IV5.3 and IV6 Beta2 here. But I've done some
> not too complex things with Beta2 under production environment, and I
don't
> want to send it down the Rubicon.
>
> So I'd appreciate an answer here, before my Beta2 expires, which is some
> days before Christmas.
>
> Thanks
> Walter
>
> Dipl.-Ing. Walter Holzwarth
> Ingenieurbuero fuer Maschinenbau
> Brombeerweg 23
> D-37281 Wanfried
> Tel. +49-5655-92144 Fax +49-5655-92145
> http://www.holzwarth-cad.de
>
>
> "Ron Crain" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:4F12C20A1A0C7BFBB88637B68264DAEC@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Beta testing is a double edged sword. You never find the critical bugs
> > until you use it in a production environment - but - you never use beta
in
> a
> > production environment because the files aren't guaranteed to work with
> the
> > released code.
> >
> > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message
> > news:C7AEEEC1E42BF7E63F41798E53676781@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Good to hear, but I've got to wonder; how did this happen?
> > > How many beta testers were there? A dozen?
> > > Or, were all the issues known at shipping time?
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > > ==================
> > >
> > > "DJSpaceMouse" wrote in message
> > > news:f11eaa7.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > ...........
> > > ......from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.
> > > ......
> > > Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire product have been
resolved.
> > > ......
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
*Holzwarth, W.
Message 29 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 08:11 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
Is that really, Larry?
I've noticed a file migration from Beta1 to Beta2, without problems in the
files I had. So, where's the difference there from Beta 2 to the final
release?

And it's obvious, that there are many technical reasons for no downward
compatibility. But an upward compatibility is an important thing, in my
eyes. Even between beta files and the final release.

And I can't imagine the beta to be so useless, that there had to be an
overall change in the file format.

Walter


"Larry Caldwell" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5E36A291BFF04C1BE67F0F1EDBA73B31@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I might add: beta is always a crap-shoot, I guess some would say.
Sometimes
> beta files will open in the final release. I think R4 beta files would
open
> in R5 but later, maybe after a SP or something, I would see errors that
the
> file was created in beta and can't be opened so I wouldn't ever trust beta
> files to work and keep working.
> ~Larry
>
> "W. Holzwarth" wrote in message
> news:FC882E1A06AE3A5C776476003B57AD98@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I've asked this before, but perhaps I've overlooked the answer to my
> > question. So let me do it again, please:
> >
> > What's the actual situation for IAMs und IPTs out of IV6 Beta2 in the
> final
> > release?
> > Can they mostly be used further on in IV6 Final?
> > Do cases exist, where IV6 Beta files refuse to work in the official
> release?
> > If there's an overall problem with beta files, where's the reason for
it?
> >
> > At the moment I'm still with IV5.3 and IV6 Beta2 here. But I've done
some
> > not too complex things with Beta2 under production environment, and I
> don't
> > want to send it down the Rubicon.
> >
> > So I'd appreciate an answer here, before my Beta2 expires, which is some
> > days before Christmas.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Walter
> >
> > Dipl.-Ing. Walter Holzwarth
> > Ingenieurbuero fuer Maschinenbau
> > Brombeerweg 23
> > D-37281 Wanfried
> > Tel. +49-5655-92144 Fax +49-5655-92145
> > http://www.holzwarth-cad.de
> >
> >
> > "Ron Crain" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> > news:4F12C20A1A0C7BFBB88637B68264DAEC@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Beta testing is a double edged sword. You never find the critical
bugs
> > > until you use it in a production environment - but - you never use
beta
> in
> > a
> > > production environment because the files aren't guaranteed to work
with
> > the
> > > released code.
> > >
> > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message
> > > news:C7AEEEC1E42BF7E63F41798E53676781@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > Good to hear, but I've got to wonder; how did this happen?
> > > > How many beta testers were there? A dozen?
> > > > Or, were all the issues known at shipping time?
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > > ==================
> > > >
> > > > "DJSpaceMouse" wrote in message
> > > > news:f11eaa7.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > ...........
> > > > ......from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.
> > > > ......
> > > > Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire product have been
> resolved.
> > > > ......
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
*Caldwell, Larry
Message 30 of 30 (77 Views)

Re:

11-01-2002 10:12 PM in reply to: DJSpaceMouse
I don't know doodle about programming, so I don't have a clue what the
reason might be. Heck, all I'm going by is the beta2 files I tried to
open/migrate which failed (only thing that did fail so far). This is just a
personal observation and certainly won't be chiseled in my headstone. I
would assume that if it was possible to allow the beta files to open in the
final release, they would make it so. On the one beta where they did open,
near the end of the beta it was mentioned as being the case. The way I look
at is that beta is just that. I sign up because I want to but leave any
expectations out of the equation.
~Larry


"W. Holzwarth" wrote in message
news:B5CBC2827A428D43D693CF844F1E8511@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Is that really, Larry?
> I've noticed a file migration from Beta1 to Beta2, without problems in the
> files I had. So, where's the difference there from Beta 2 to the final
> release?
>
> And it's obvious, that there are many technical reasons for no downward
> compatibility. But an upward compatibility is an important thing, in my
> eyes. Even between beta files and the final release.
>
> And I can't imagine the beta to be so useless, that there had to be an
> overall change in the file format.
>
> Walter
>
>
> "Larry Caldwell" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:5E36A291BFF04C1BE67F0F1EDBA73B31@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I might add: beta is always a crap-shoot, I guess some would say.
> Sometimes
> > beta files will open in the final release. I think R4 beta files would
> open
> > in R5 but later, maybe after a SP or something, I would see errors that
> the
> > file was created in beta and can't be opened so I wouldn't ever trust
beta
> > files to work and keep working.
> > ~Larry
> >
> > "W. Holzwarth" wrote in message
> > news:FC882E1A06AE3A5C776476003B57AD98@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > I've asked this before, but perhaps I've overlooked the answer to my
> > > question. So let me do it again, please:
> > >
> > > What's the actual situation for IAMs und IPTs out of IV6 Beta2 in the
> > final
> > > release?
> > > Can they mostly be used further on in IV6 Final?
> > > Do cases exist, where IV6 Beta files refuse to work in the official
> > release?
> > > If there's an overall problem with beta files, where's the reason for
> it?
> > >
> > > At the moment I'm still with IV5.3 and IV6 Beta2 here. But I've done
> some
> > > not too complex things with Beta2 under production environment, and I
> > don't
> > > want to send it down the Rubicon.
> > >
> > > So I'd appreciate an answer here, before my Beta2 expires, which is
some
> > > days before Christmas.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > Dipl.-Ing. Walter Holzwarth
> > > Ingenieurbuero fuer Maschinenbau
> > > Brombeerweg 23
> > > D-37281 Wanfried
> > > Tel. +49-5655-92144 Fax +49-5655-92145
> > > http://www.holzwarth-cad.de
> > >
> > >
> > > "Ron Crain" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> > > news:4F12C20A1A0C7BFBB88637B68264DAEC@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > Beta testing is a double edged sword. You never find the critical
> bugs
> > > > until you use it in a production environment - but - you never use
> beta
> > in
> > > a
> > > > production environment because the files aren't guaranteed to work
> with
> > > the
> > > > released code.
> > > >
> > > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message
> > > > news:C7AEEEC1E42BF7E63F41798E53676781@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > > Good to hear, but I've got to wonder; how did this happen?
> > > > > How many beta testers were there? A dozen?
> > > > > Or, were all the issues known at shipping time?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff
> > > > > ==================
> > > > >
> > > > > "DJSpaceMouse" wrote in message
> > > > > news:f11eaa7.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > > ...........
> > > > > ......from Robert "Buzz" Kross from Autodesk.
> > > > > ......
> > > > > Over 600 customer issues spanning the entire product have been
> > resolved.
> > > > > ......
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

You are not logged in.

Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register

Announcements
Are you familiar with the Autodesk Expert Elites? The Expert Elite program is made up of customers that help other customers by sharing knowledge and exemplifying an engaging style of collaboration. To learn more, please visit our Expert Elite website.

Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.

Ask the Community


Inventor Exchange Apps

Created by the community for the community, Autodesk Exchange Apps for Autodesk Inventor helps you achieve greater speed, accuracy, and automation from concept to manufacturing.

Connect with Inventor

Twitter

Facebook

Blogs

Pinterest

Youtube