No, the metaphor is more like a car that is designed to run on gasoline but you'd rather run on electric. There's nothing that can be done during this release except to wait for the flex-fuel vehicle to be released. Thus, the share path length recommendation has everything to do with this conversation because unless you do so, you cannot install it. Period.
Regardless, the limitation is on Microsoft Windows, and not Autodesk. Thus any software manufacture would potentially run into this same issue. Hopefully, this will not be an issue moving forward.
I'd like to bring up the fact that the latest 2013 suite we are rolling out recently is even worse than before.
I was able to shorten a path length with the 2012 suite and get around the character limit. But with 2013, it was impossible so I just created an individual share for it and flipped a birdy at the deployer as it ran.
The fact remains, not only should the installer be double checking path length PRIOR TO STARTING TO CREATE THE DEPLOYMENT but the people actually making the installation packages should be doing it as well.
I doubt it would take one of Autodesk's engineers more than 1-2 hours per product in the suite or several hours to add the path length check to the deployer; and yet it would save hundreds (if not thousands or tens of thousands) of hours of their customer's time dealing with these issues.
But why do that when you can just have a moderator blame the customer everytime the issue crops up on the forums.
I don't see any moderators saying the customer is wrong in this thread except for the OP stating the work-around for the known issue. Anyway, I doubt any customer has spent thousands to tens-of-thousands of hours trying to figure out that a short path share would resolve the issue. It took me 15 seconds to write this. And I've never experienced this issue because I have always adhered to the \\servername\share convention.
The fact of the matter is Autodesk has known about this issue for several releases and refuses to do anything about it. The CUSTOMER is being inconvenienced by it. Fix the thing AutoDesk.
Thank U, that's exactly the point. I've done a bit of development myself and there is no reason that anyone would need filenames 70 - 90 characters long. They know this is an issue so for well now since 2009 for sure from my personal experience. And of course if doesn't error out until it reaches that file, like give me a break, do a check sum on the file path names before actually installing or even simpler yet shorten the filenames. I spent way too many hours have to rebuild packages because Autodesk shear laziness. This maybe would have been acceptable for a version, I get that programmers mess up but 5 years in a row.
You are not helping any of us and you are not contributing anything. Some of us follow this to see Autodesks responce to this, no one cares about yours.
If Autodesk fixed there product than I would have anything to say about it, now would I. And after the hours I had to spend to fix my packages, I am going to complain a little. Trust me I have already made many feedbacks about it.
Autodesk was the one that originally created this post as a response to this known support issue. I am simply supporting the position that this is easily avoidable by following their recommendation. I apologize if my support for the work-around was taken out of context. I agree that steps should be taken to prevent this in the future, but the simple fact remains that this is the fix for now. Furthermore, this is a peer to peer forum. I recommend that you fill out a customer support request in recommending that this be resolved in a future release.
Autodesk is working on a plan to resolve this issue internally. i.e. make paths a short a possible. I have posted a workaround based on this forum post here:
This post refers to an issue with 3DS Max Design in a Suite:
This is a hot topic that should be resolved in a future release.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register