no, not in totally.
"Where will not be any enhancement there will be the end!"
I think that new features for most of us are very important.
Take for example the new ST10 functionallity to handle mesh date directly within the part model in a similar way as Your own created model features.
This for me is something I was expecting for years and where I am very, very happy to get it now.
And there are several other enhancements which will be improtant to other users.
I think that to hear and to fullfill the request of us as endusers is as important as to provide a stable software.
So of course, software should run without errors, with no crashes and the best would be if any software would act according to the user in front of it.
But this will not work, at least I think not in our life.
Ii You once have tried to write a small set of program code, You will find, that this code will work properly when You are testing it and when You are using it.
But in the same moment when another person will use it You will find situations of problems, errors and crashes. This has to do with the way we all think, work and communicate.
Everyone here has his personal style and his personal method.
This makes it hard to provide a overall and global solution fitting for everybody.
And this doesn't mean that I agree with a software that crashes, is instable and buggy but a little bit I understand the problems which are connecting with a big piece of program code.
And don't forget the environement!
We have different versions of operating systems and all of us have different languages.
And believe me, You will not believe what can be influenced with operating system and language!
So - and again as so often - this is a personal opinion as everyone of us can have:
I'm very happy with the developement and progress Solid Edge is showing year for year and I also say thanks to SE developement for their work.
But this will not be a charter for crashes and bugs more a
"I understand how difficult it is!"
Fully agree with Wolfgang.
I too write small and big macros and when it runs into few updates and changes/updates, spins out of control and becomes unmanageable.
Solid Edge after 30 releases is perhaps a huge and quite complex piece of code to make changes swiftly.
The way forward is to garner support using this forum for those bugs/new features so they make it to the top in the list.
this not only is my opionin.
Of course Solid Edge is a "Big Bang" of software, and has developed from the initial particle to a complex universe.
But - to stay with the comparison - there not only is one univers, there are several parallel universes (hope this is the correct plural).
And where the differ is - as mentionend - the base in a sense of operating system and language used.
As You @Tushar said, if You ever tried to write even a small program, You will see, that it doesn't work for the community member in US or Australia, due to the fact the are using English while You started Your macro in German.
And this not only has to do with the different number format we are using (. instead of ,).
All the standard properties have a different name, and many things are handled differently.
I remember a situation many years ago, where I got a clal from a customer to solve an IGES import problem.
or was it STEP, anyway doesn't matter. It was not possible to open this file although there was only a small ring inside with a chamfer on one edge. Nothing more.
I tried it myself on my computer, no success.
So I called support in Germany, sending them the file too.
Immediately I got the response: "No problem - just opend!"
During a WEB meeting they stay connected to my computer lokking what is the difference from their installtion to mine.
Nothing we saw in the first moment. Same operating system, with same service packs and the same language. Same Solid Edge with the same service pack in the same language.
OK, but there somewhere must be a difference since it worked there but not here.
Finally we looked into the Country setting of the computer and OK, there was a difference due to my computer was set to German - Austria while theirs was German - Germany. Of course!
They requested me to change it to German - Germany too, what lead to a reboot request of the computer.
During the reboot sequence there must happend an update of certain DLLs and - tatatata - suddenly everything worked as assumed.
This short story shall show what everything can influence the bahaviuor of a piece of software.
And again the conclusion of the story should be:
"Not always the intial programmers of the code did the mistake and brought in the error, sometimes it also could be that this is coming from a different point, we have not percieved before!"
In this sense I apologize here for all the problems my macros have brought or will bring to the users,
even they are for free. This is not a bad intent. Only the fact that they originally are done in German and afterwards translated to run international - if requested so.
So please let me know if there are any mistakes and errors, if possible I will take care about and modify them adequate.
and of course I hope that developement of Solid Edge will not stop to bring new features and functions into "our" Solid Edge, that they will continue to hear onto the users needs and requests, and, of course, they try to make this as stable and bug free as possible.
For these efforts a BIg Thank You
Bugs are a moving target, so impractical and ultimately wasteful to aim to eliminate all of them. The curve of diminishing returns...
But I'm sure you'll all agree that it's ridiculous to say it is too hard to fix bugs so we will just add new features instead...
If you could magically know where the biggest productivity gain for all Solid Edge users could be made, I bet it's not in adding a new 'Block-Buster' feature, but in streamlining, or slight improvement existing features....
As a new week is dawning, and after reading the replies I would like to state that I intended no disrespect or disappointment in the work of the people and teams that work on SE or any of the Siemens products.
I do not claim to understand their work environment, however from what little experience I have in programming I can imagine the developers are doing all they can to meet the requirements of their assigned task; have a feature implemented that passes these test case criteria and ready to roll by date X. Many of us deal with this in different lines of work. We can either meet the requirement to get the feature rolled out first to market and meet the demands of customers/marketing/sales etc. or keep working and refining until it's polished and I don't lay awake fussing about something I know could have been better if I only had another day. Trouble is the latter requires more time than what most markets are willing to pay for. Two extremes, a constant flow of new features at an incredible pace or behind everyone else in the market with a product that works 99% of the time (by some measure.) Somewhere in the middle is happiness, that middle target changes from person to person. Finally getting to my point; I am admittedly far off to one side and just one data point. I would much rather work with a stable program that is reliable with a well-defined feature set. Rolling out a new “Long Term Support” version every two or three years where department wide training can be budgeted and planned for sounds good to me. Smaller bi-annual releases for the customers that enjoy the flexibility to run cutting edge releases is great as they do benefit us all. Some of you probably notice, I’m stealing that release model from another software.
By the end of last week there were just enough problems dealt with and next to none were a shortage of features. The publication was sent to me in an email, I made time at the end of the day and attempted to read through it. I didn’t see any references to improvements in robustness, it was almost completely fancy new features that look great in a publication. So as stated, I couldn’t resist posting a little poke. I believe the developers are all doing their job very well, it is my opinion that marketing should put more emphasis on stability and robustness than what they currently are. Again, this is just my opinion and I may be in a minority.
I think I read somewhere that the current BMW 3 series is bigger than the first 7 series (maybe 5 series?) so 'feature creep' is not just a software thing. And there are countless other examples..
@bnemec I think your intent was clear - change the balance a little to address some lingering bugs/functionality issues, at the temporary expense of new features. I couldn't agree more.
Not many people I talk to you sync yet, and it's been around for years. New block buster features are cool and some users will really benefit, but I think a significant number won't ever use them.