Inventor General Discussion

Reply
Active Contributor
loop29
Posts: 34
Registered: ‎11-21-2003
Message 51 of 67 (53 Views)

Re: Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 09:56 PM in reply to: edarlak
I have the comparison to a complete assembly of one of our products with 355 parts, showing in viewport with 10 Hz rotating in IV5.3 and IV6 with poststatictics=1. Open a part in an assembly is much more faster than in IV5.3. Sorry, but this data is completely confidential. No informations on release date for SQ4 yet, but I will keep your informed when it´s there.

regards
*Joe
Message 52 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 09:59 PM in reply to: edarlak
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 05:15:45 -0800, "Sean Dotson"
com> wrote:

>"I hope they start putting it back into the US-licenses as well. That
>should get some massive, nasty responses here. "

You realize that even with the current authorization process, you
must get a new authorization code at every install. If Autodesk were
to go out of business... we will start loosing access to our drawings.

Joe Dunfee
*Grunwald, Mike
Message 53 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 10:18 PM in reply to: edarlak
We use fastlook for non inventor users to print and
view idw's.  It opens large files quickly (doesn't try to update the data
from the model).  Even the Inventor users use fastlook, and it views acad
files as well.

 

Mike
*Fulford, Drew
Message 54 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 10:22 PM in reply to: edarlak
Wrong joe.

--
Drew Fulford B.A.Sc. Systems Engineer
Solid Caddgroup Inc. Burlington, Ontario
Tel: (905)331-9670, Fax: (905)331-7280
Corporate: http://www.solidcadcam.com/

Member of the Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program
Visit my MCAD website @ http://www.mymcad.com/



"Joe" wrote in message
news:3dca714d.2555704@discussion.autodesk.com...
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 05:15:45 -0800, "Sean Dotson"
> com> wrote:
>
> >"I hope they start putting it back into the US-licenses as well. That
> >should get some massive, nasty responses here. "
>
> You realize that even with the current authorization process, you
> must get a new authorization code at every install. If Autodesk were
> to go out of business... we will start loosing access to our drawings.
>
> Joe Dunfee
*Fulford, Drew
Message 55 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 11:23 PM in reply to: edarlak
Here's my take.. My additional tests don't paint such a bad picture.. I used
migration utility.

Decreases
R6 program load time: Slower the first time: Number of times done a day:
Few: Reason, Larger code base, more memory used.
Sketching responsiveness: Slower but managable: Number of times a day:
Frequent
Rotation Graphics Performance: About 80% from engine tests: Number of times
a day: Frequent

Unchanged
R6 IDW load time: Equal: Number of times a day: Frequent

Improvements
R6 assy data load time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
Feature edit time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
R6 IDW update time: Much Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
R6 IDW Usability/Responsiveness: Much much better: Number of times a day:
Frequent

So its a measurement of whats really important to you.

--
Drew Fulford B.A.Sc. Systems Engineer
Solid Caddgroup Inc. Burlington, Ontario
Tel: (905)331-9670, Fax: (905)331-7280
Corporate: http://www.solidcadcam.com/

Member of the Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program
Visit my MCAD website @ http://www.mymcad.com/



"edarlak" wrote in message
news:f120400.49@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> The "slowness" has nothing to do with particular data sets. All 4 machines
that we installed IV on are exibiting the same lag in performance. R6.exe
takes about 2x times to load than 5.3, slowness of cursor in sketch mode is
another frustrating slow-down. Openning of files takes longer. R6 uses more
ram for the same files than 5.3 required. Graphics performace has degraded
from what it was in 5.3. Lets put it this way, I can say that nothing in R6
is faster than it was in 5.3.
> The only thing left that I have not tried is installing Win2k SP3. Nothing
else on the machines has changed except for the upgrading of Inventor. R6
simply requires more system resources than 5.3. The one machine that I set
up to give non-IV users access to .idw's for prining (because AutoDesk never
could get VoloView to work) can't even open up files without crashing, I get
the IV has used more than 80%... blah...blah...blah... until I get an IV.exe
error. Typical AutoDesk Code writing practice it seems (keeps the hardware
manufacturers happy though). Maybe I need to tell management all the
engineers need new computers every year!
>
>
*Laimer, Leo
Message 56 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 11:37 PM in reply to: edarlak
Amen.


--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen- und Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad
Ischl - Austria

 

 


style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
The
"slowness" has nothing to do with particular data sets. All 4 machines that we
installed IV on are exibiting the same lag in performance. R6.exe takes about
2x times to load than 5.3, slowness of cursor in sketch mode is another
frustrating slow-down. Openning of files takes longer. R6 uses more ram for
the same files than 5.3 required. Graphics performace has degraded from what
it was in 5.3. Lets put it this way, I can say that nothing in R6 is faster
than it was in 5.3.

The only thing left that I have not tried is installing Win2k SP3. Nothing
else on the machines has changed except for the upgrading of Inventor. R6
simply requires more system resources than 5.3. The one machine that I set up
to give non-IV users access to .idw's for prining (because AutoDesk never
could get VoloView to work) can't even open up files without crashing, I get
the IV has used more than 80%... blah...blah...blah... until I get an IV.exe
error. Typical AutoDesk Code writing practice it seems (keeps the hardware
manufacturers happy though). Maybe I need to tell management all the engineers
need new computers every year!

*Laimer, Leo
Message 57 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-06-2002 11:38 PM in reply to: edarlak
In my tests, IV6 was about 20% slower than 5.3 in
graphics in a huge assembly.

 

Regards,
--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen-
und Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad Ischl - Austria


style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
I
have the comparison to a complete assembly of one of our products with 355
parts, showing in viewport with 10 Hz rotating in IV5.3 and IV6 with
poststatictics=1. Open a part in an assembly is much more faster than in
IV5.3. Sorry, but this data is completely confidential. No informations on
release date for SQ4 yet, but I will keep your informed when it´s there.

regards

*Laimer, Leo
Message 58 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-07-2002 12:02 AM in reply to: edarlak
Drew,
This sounds interesting:

> Decreases
> R6 program load time: Slower the first time: Number of times done a day:
> Few: Reason, Larger code base, more memory used.
> Sketching responsiveness: Slower but managable: Number of times a day:
> Frequent
> Rotation Graphics Performance: About 80% from engine tests: Number of
times
> a day: Frequent

I see the same decreases here.

> Unchanged
> R6 IDW load time: Equal: Number of times a day: Frequent
>
> Improvements
> R6 assy data load time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> Feature edit time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> R6 IDW update time: Much Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> R6 IDW Usability/Responsiveness: Much much better: Number of times a day:
> Frequent

I have no real comparison between 5.3 and 6, as I've never done heavy
drafting pre IV6.
But switching between MDT's drawings and IDW is like taking off the easy
jogging shoes and putting on heavy rubber boots and wading through deep mud.
I mean, there are WORLDS between the two packages regarding speed and
responsiveness.

Not to blame you for this, but I can never be contented with such a speed
decrease, even if it is a increase coming from IV5.
Hopefully Adesk is working on this!

Regards,
--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen- und Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad Ischl - Austria


"Drew Fulford" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:C4F1C68E4435D13B6ECC853B84687DA0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Here's my take.. My additional tests don't paint such a bad picture.. I
used
> migration utility.
>
> Decreases
> R6 program load time: Slower the first time: Number of times done a day:
> Few: Reason, Larger code base, more memory used.
> Sketching responsiveness: Slower but managable: Number of times a day:
> Frequent
> Rotation Graphics Performance: About 80% from engine tests: Number of
times
> a day: Frequent
>
> Unchanged
> R6 IDW load time: Equal: Number of times a day: Frequent
>
> Improvements
> R6 assy data load time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> Feature edit time: Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> R6 IDW update time: Much Faster: Number of times a day: Frequent
> R6 IDW Usability/Responsiveness: Much much better: Number of times a day:
> Frequent
>
> So its a measurement of whats really important to you.
>
> --
> Drew Fulford B.A.Sc. Systems Engineer
> Solid Caddgroup Inc. Burlington, Ontario
> Tel: (905)331-9670, Fax: (905)331-7280
> Corporate: http://www.solidcadcam.com/
>
> Member of the Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program
> Visit my MCAD website @ http://www.mymcad.com/
>
>
>
> "edarlak" wrote in message
> news:f120400.49@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > The "slowness" has nothing to do with particular data sets. All 4
machines
> that we installed IV on are exibiting the same lag in performance. R6.exe
> takes about 2x times to load than 5.3, slowness of cursor in sketch mode
is
> another frustrating slow-down. Openning of files takes longer. R6 uses
more
> ram for the same files than 5.3 required. Graphics performace has degraded
> from what it was in 5.3. Lets put it this way, I can say that nothing in
R6
> is faster than it was in 5.3.
> > The only thing left that I have not tried is installing Win2k SP3.
Nothing
> else on the machines has changed except for the upgrading of Inventor. R6
> simply requires more system resources than 5.3. The one machine that I set
> up to give non-IV users access to .idw's for prining (because AutoDesk
never
> could get VoloView to work) can't even open up files without crashing, I
get
> the IV has used more than 80%... blah...blah...blah... until I get an
IV.exe
> error. Typical AutoDesk Code writing practice it seems (keeps the hardware
> manufacturers happy though). Maybe I need to tell management all the
> engineers need new computers every year!
> >
> >
>
>
*Jaquith, Walt
Message 59 of 67 (53 Views)

Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-07-2002 12:19 AM in reply to: edarlak
Who's that 'we' Joe was talking about? The guy obviously hasn't ever
reinstalled a US version of Inventor. Either that or he's deliberately
spreading misinformation.

Gee, I wonder which?

Walt
Active Contributor
davejan
Posts: 41
Registered: ‎11-02-2003
Message 60 of 67 (53 Views)

Re: Why? Why? Why? Why?...

11-07-2002 01:38 AM in reply to: edarlak
Just curious,
If the U.S. does not use c-dilla, then why do I have a c-dilla directory and files still hanging around on my computer?? I used MDT 4, 5 then went to inventor series at IV 5.0.. did any of these use c-dilla in the U.S.?? and will it cause me problems with IV 6 because it is on my computer??

David
Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.