SW New Copy Protection Is a Big Problem Beware for 2008 3

[Rocko]

SW recently changed something with their copy protection. Now even if you have saved the past updates for SW2008. If you are no longer on subscription they will not install. It states you must be on active subscription service to install service packs. What a load of BS. I had a active subscription including SP1.1 for 2008 and now it will not allow me to install on my new computer the 1.1 service pack just because we are no longer doing the subscription service. So beware to all that just downloading and keeping a copy of the service pack will not allow you to install it if you no longer do the subscription service. I have a big problem with this since I had paid for this service pack already while still on subscription.

 

[SBaugh]

Well if the Joke I was told yesterday was true then you "prolly" could have met me then. I was told SWWC is in Ontario next year "As a joke". Not going this year, but suppose to next year.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

"If it's not broke, Don't fix it!"

faq731-376

 

[fcsuper]

What are we talking about again? ;-)

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

I think it was something to do with hijacking threads.

 

[ren3of3]

"Can anyone answer my question? What other software companies charge for service packs pertaining to bug fixes. I'm not trying to stir the pot here. I'd really like to know if there are sofwtare companies doing this other than CAD companies."

Rockguy, to answer your question in a broad sense: Apple is the most obvious offender. They charge extreme amounts of cash for point releases of their OS. Apple charges full "upgrade" price to their users, even the user has a service subscription.
Similar, but not exactly the same model.

"Never offend people with style when you can offend them with substance." --Sam Brown

http://www.danielanderson.info

 

[sldwkmin]

Several automotive parts database softwares charge extreme amounts for database updates as well. Starting out at around $400 a month, and it's just a database.

Cole M
CSWP, CSWST, CSWI, CPDM
HP XW4300, 3.4g proc, 2.5g RAM, ATI Fire GL 3100
Dell M90, Core 2 Duo, 2g RAM, Nvidia Quadra FX2500M
Equus (custom), P4, 3.4g proc, 3g RAM, Nvidia Quadro FX3400

 

[rockguy]

Thanks for the answers.

Are these upgrades in the sense they are new functionality or in the sense they are bug fixes?

It just seems wrong to me, no matter what the software that the user is required to pay for fixes that shouldn't have been in the softare in the first place and is clearly the fault of the software manufacturer. If it's an upgrade or extension to existing functionality then yes the user should pay. Along the same lines, users shouldn't be forced to upgrade for software compatability reasons. In SW case version 2008 should read and write previous version files.

Rob Rodriguez CSWP

http://www.axiscadsolutions.com

http://www.robrodriguez.com

http://designsmarter.typepad.com/rob_rodriguez/

Eastern Region SWUGN Representative

http://www.swugn.org

http://www.nvtswug.com

SW 2007 SP 2.0

 

[dgowans]

If it's an upgrade or extension to existing functionality then yes the user should pay. Along the same lines, users shouldn't be forced to upgrade for software compatability reasons. In SW case version 2008 should read and write previous version files.

Not that I want to get into this debate again, but there's a bit of a contradiction there, no?

 

[ren3of3]

Not necessarily. Adobe has kept it's format for PhotoShop flexible so that version 8 can read version 9 files. The desire to upgrade is generated by adding features to the program instead of demanding upgrades to maintain file format compatibility.(As for CAD, Rhino allows version 3 to read and edit files generated in version 4.)

Getting back to the topic as a whole, I would agree that it's ludicrous to pay for fixes to a faulty product. Held to regular consumer goods standards, the Better Business Bureau would be shutting SolidWorks down and other agencies would be removing the product from the shelves.


"Never offend people with style when you can offend them with substance." --Sam Brown

http://www.danielanderson.info

 

[rfus]

Seeing as SW is owned by Dassault, we should Blame it on the French!

Maybe if everyone protests they'll get it.

 

[sldwkmin]

Rockguy

You mention that SW should read and write other versions. Do any other 3D modeling associative cad softwares do this? I think it would be nearly impossible as new functions that require the new code may be included in the model and if you opened it in the older version those functions would fail. Seems like common sense that that wouldn't work. So then the complaint would be you made a model in 2008 and you want to open it in 2007 and features fail so code needs to be added to 2007 so now are you entitled to an update to 2007 b/c you were on subscription when you bought 2007? I think if we all take a look at the big picture it's obvious the line has to be somewhere. We're not talking about word processing or simple lines here where the code is minimal in comparison. And it all comes down to if people weren't trying to skirt the system and "steal" software and upgrades this functionality wouldn't of been necessary. I would think the paying customers are comforted knowing that their dollars aren't going to support those that aren't paying.

Cole M
CSWP, CSWST, CSWI, CPDM
HP XW4300, 3.4g proc, 2.5g RAM, ATI Fire GL 3100
Dell M90, Core 2 Duo, 2g RAM, Nvidia Quadra FX2500M
Equus (custom), P4, 3.4g proc, 3g RAM, Nvidia Quadro FX3400

 

[rockguy]

I'm not aware of any other 3D CAD modeling companies that have backward compatability (although a previous posts says Rhino 3 and 4 can do this).

"So then the complaint would be you made a model in 2008 and you want to open it in 2007 and features fail so code needs to be added to 2007 so now are you entitled to an update to 2007 b/c you were on subscription when you bought 2007?"

This is not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is if I purchase SW 2007 then all bug fixes released for SW 2007 should be available to me free of charge. I should have to and would expect to pay for the upgrade to SW 2008.

As for file compatability. If I create a file in SW2007, open the file in SW 2008, make NO modifications and save the file it will no longer work in SW 2007. I agree it's difficult to push new functionality back to an older release and I wouldn't expect that type of compatability between versions. However a cut extrude in 2007 is a cut extrude in 2008 and so is a boss extrude and so is a fillet and so is......well you get the point. I see no reason why "the basics" can't have version compatability. The simple example of opening a 2007 file in 2008 and saving rendering he file useless in 2007 is absurd to me. This is a great example of forcing the user to upgrade to the newest version. If you work totally by yourself and never have to interface with another computer or human staying with an older version that meets your needs is fine. If you work with the rest of the world not upgrading means not working.

Rob Rodriguez CSWP

http://www.axiscadsolutions.com

http://www.robrodriguez.com

http://designsmarter.typepad.com/rob_rodriguez/

Eastern Region SWUGN Representative

http://www.swugn.org

http://www.nvtswug.com

SW 2007 SP 2.0

 

[Rocko]

sldwkmin,
How about in the case that started all this. I paid for up to SP1.1 for 2008 and now, it will not let me install it because I am no longer on subscription. This is both unethical but illegal in my opinion. I would hate to be someone who later on is on SW2008 SP?.? and no longer does the subscription(extortion as it is currently being utilized on reinstalling SP's) then gets a new Computer and reinstalls SW2008 and is stuck with SP0.0 and cannot access their designs created with SW2008 SP?.? because they were created with a later SP. That is total BS and SW needs to be nailed for this.

 

[JMirisola]

As long as the file is an '08 file, you can open it in '08 without worrying about the SP. SP's have no bearing on the ability to open files, only what version you're on.

Jeff Mirisola, CSWP
Certified DriveWorks AE

http://designsmarter.typepad.com/jeffs_blog

Dell M90, Core2 Duo
4GB RAM
Nvidia 3500M

 

[ren3of3]

sldwkmin, by "associative" do you mean parametric?

I guess that's where I see the difference in the market right now. As for other high end apps, whether it be graphics, CAD, or audio editing, the compatibility issues are not prominent enough to demand a subscription service for fixes. In these instances, there is little or no "patching" of the older program needed to read newer files.
Application development for other disciplines offers precedent to support the idea that compatibility can be built into a file format.

Perhaps parametric relationships inside a SW file is indeed complex enough to merit upgrading your core engine code in order for version files to be compatible.
Personally, I think this could be solved if Dassault ever wanted to cut this very lucrative income generator.

Finally, back to the big picture, this isn't about being able to open 2008 files in 2007. It's about having to pay through the nose for fixes. If you bought a new tv and audio only worked on the odd channels, you'd call the manufacturer or retailer and demand compensation or exchange for a faulty product. Would you be alright being told that the only fix for the problem was to pay a subscription fee?



"Never offend people with style when you can offend them with substance." --Sam Brown

http://www.danielanderson.info

 

[Rocko]

JMirisola,
That is not always the case, I remember back last year on SW2007 their was an issue with changes to an SP that would not allow a previous SP open them. I am not trying to instigate an issue with you , just pointing out that it did happen one time during SW2007 numerous SP's.

 

[JMirisola]

Ok, generally, SPs don't cause that problem. Obviously, it was a case of "fixing this, breaking that".

Jeff Mirisola, CSWP
Certified DriveWorks AE

http://designsmarter.typepad.com/jeffs_blog

Dell M90, Core2 Duo
4GB RAM
Nvidia 3500M

 

[ctopher]

Just a FYI...updated to SP2.0
No problems.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 2.0
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 10-07-07)
ctopher's blog

 

[dgowans]

If you work totally by yourself and never have to interface with another computer or human staying with an older version that meets your needs is fine. If you work with the rest of the world not upgrading means not working.

Rob,

If you work with the rest of the world and need to upgrade to keep pace, is that not a function of the business model? I fail to see how that is the fault of Solidworks.

I'm strictly speaking of upgrades here. IMO, this is a completely separate issue than service packs/bug fixes.

 

[Valshnar]

Folks, there is a cure for all this angst;

Step 1: put in an enhancement request, as suggested

Step 2: take a deep breath

Step 3: Switch to CATIA V5 for a year or two

Step 4: Switch to Solidworks

Now your software will be far, far cheaper, less buggy, with great support and far easier to use than what you've been on for the last year. Oh, and did I mention that you will now get technical support with your subscription? That will be a nice change for you after using V5...

Life is good!

 

[SBaugh]

FYI, there is some new functionality added in SP's that most of you are not aware of. its minimal stuff, but there is still new stuff added in Service packs.

I noticed you complaints are more about fixes and you think that fixes should be free. I had forgotten about this during my last post, but there are new slight enhancments per service pack. See the Release notes. That is where you can find other improvements that are not in the What's new.

If they were just fixes, then this would be a different post.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

"If it's not broke, Don't fix it!"

faq731-376