8 9 10 11 12 1,042 Replies Latest reply on Mar 23, 2016 2:39 PM by David Tiefenbrunn Go to original post
      • 135. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
        Jory Blagden

        If anyone thinks this program has became more stable in the last 3-4 years they are obviously taking some kind of drugs that may or may not be legal. I run AutoCAD 25 % of the time and SW 75 % of the time. Guess which program hardly EVER crashes? Between SW and EPDM it is a constant struggle. This is why a huge number of us are continually complaining about "stop making changes to everything and make it run without crashing." I had to explain to my boss that every time I hit save, the section line moves up or down. It took me several hours to get the view to look how I wanted and get a saved copy checked into EPDM without it changing. Complete, utter, bull corn. Everytime I opened the top assembly drawing.....the BOM split line moves. I have four copies on my desk. One goes up to find no 25 on sheet 1, the next 27, then 26, then it ended on 24. How does this even seem possible? I never move the line or adjusted anything in the BOM between printouts. Deamons I tell you. I loved this software at one time. I want to love it again. Please make it lovable again.

        • 136. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
          Adrian Velazquez

          I've been testing 2016 for 3 months (SP0 & 1) and have crashed 4 times, yes i'm keeping notes since as an admin I test the software before deploying to 40+ users. And deploying the installs was a breeze with an Admin Image compare to 2015 (pain in the a**)


          Issues found:


          I had a user that was crashing constantly... after 15 minutes of CSI it turns out it was the SW "blank" file templates... after I loaded our file templates he was running smooth.


          I also found on my laptop I had 2014 and 15 installed, running 2016 was sluggish! after removing 2015, 2016 was running smooth.

          • 137. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
            Jory Blagden

            I kind of think it doesn't need to changeable. I don't want to have to configure the UI every time I re-install or switch machines or keep up with an "my-UI-file-config.xyz" like some CAD packages.  Just make one and make it nice and leave it alone. Stop catering to all the "I want this and I want that" folks. One thing we can all agree on .... stop the crashes!

            • 138. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
              Dave Hoder

              Randall (or anyone else experiencing many crashes) are you using any add-ins that use a feature manager tab? There are some windows updates known to cause crashes in this case. Installing any of these updates will cause the crash issue:


              KB3093983 Released 10/13/2015

              Superseded by KB3100773 11/10/2015

              Superseded by KB3104002 12/8/2015


              I was crashing several times daily until I removed these and haven't crashed since. Do your homework regarding the consequences of removing these and contact your VAR and add-in author before removing these.

              • 139. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                Rudy Vandenbelt



                I could not agree more to ALL your points.


                This is what happens when marketing the product becomes more important than the integrity of the core.



                • 140. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                  Jeff Holliday

                  Tom - thanks for keeping us informed as to the basics of what is planned.


                  I would like to suggest that the discussion followers/users make every attempt to stay focused on the topic of each discussion thread. This particular thread deals with the GUI portion which may or may not be creating visual problems. I expect a resolution will be forthcoming. Let's not get off-track in this thread to introducing other real/perceived performance problems which are likely not contained in the GUI rework.

                  • 141. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                    Randall Hutchison

                    Thank you. I will check this out since I have crashed two more times since posting the message.

                    • 142. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                      James Willison



                      First let me say that we have not upgraded to SW 2016 and from what I have read I cannot recommend we do so. We upgraded to SW 2015 from SW 2012 last January and I was not impressed with the UI change then. I have over the last year felt my eyes getting worse and worse as I fight with the lack of contrast in not only SW 2015 but Windows 7 in general. I have been playing with my monitor settings constantly trying to find a decent balance. Now I read that there is goibng to be even LESS? Ugh. Soon I'm going to NEED a voice command input because I will not be able to distinguish where my cursor even is, let alone what icon is what.


                      The old combination of SW 2012 and Windows XP was not perfect by any means but it was markedly better than this. We are reverting back to Henry Ford's "You can have any colour you want as long as it's black" except here it's blue-gray.


                      I use SW for machinery design, anywhere from 6-12 hours a day, 5-6 days a week. I tend to use keyboard shortcuts for as much as I possibly can to avoid having to hunt and peck for icons. A few icons I use, most I don't. I keep my screen as minimal as I can, the most important screen element is the graphic display of the model, and that should use as much of the monitor screen as I can. So no heads up menu, no corner confirmation, no extraneous unwanted elements. But the colours in SW 2015 to me seem washed out. Now I read that SW 2016 is even more so.


                      The worrying trend here, for many versions now, is the fixation with "fixing the UI" and the lack of focus on fixing the real productivity killers like constant crashes and hangs where the program just sits spinning its wheels. Fix the (in)stability of the program first! There are so many things that I find wrong with the way SW works that need to be addressed but aren't (and yes I have created ER's for them).


                      And yes, the colour scheme of this forum sucks too. That's why this is (I think) my third ever post in 12 years. My eyes go blurry from reading the posts here and it's not ALL from age.


                      Rant over. Back to trying to wring some productivity out of this thing.

                      • 143. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                        Ross Warren

                        Thank you Tom and Solidworks for taking user feedback seriously.  While giving an *option* for the gray icons and UI would be great for color blind people, simply making it an option to keep the colors "as is" would go a long way to making the majority of users happy.  Microsoft found out the hard way with Windows 8, that willy-nilly changing long standing UIs is NOT a good thing for building up customer goodwill.

                        • 145. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                          Chris Clouser

                          I pointed this out in a different thread, but your picture is very helpful!  Thanks.

                          • 146. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                            Chris Clouser

                            There's a couple of reasons Treehouse wasn't popular.


                            First and foremost, the engineering profession is devolving.  Most engineers don't know what a drawing tree is.  Heck, most of the mechanical engineers I've interviewed over the past several years don't have a clue how an internal combustion engine works!  Or how some of the most simple, everyday things work, like a toilet!  So, congratulations universities, your graduates can talk all day long about 3D printing, a largely useless technology, but they don't understand how anything works so that they could design anything worth printing.


                            Next, Treehouse DID NOT WORK.  SolidWorks had some strange notion that engineers and designers would sit down and map out an assembly tree before the design has begun??!!  NO.  We design it and the tree evolves as we go.  THEN we want something to generate and track the tree based on what we are doing.  Treehouse couldn't do this.  It was Bass Ackwards.


                            What came out last year would actually take an assembly and create a tree.  This is what we need and it needs to be able to work on large assemblies, needs to be able to place it on a drawing format, move blocks and branches around easily, color code, etc, etc.

                            • 147. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                              Chris Clouser

                              Jory, I suspect one (of many) major causes of crashes is the Zero Thickness Geometry error, or another name is non-manifold geometry.


                              If you're not aware of it, search the forums for ZTG.  It was the number one voted Top Ten item last year.


                              This would be admittedly a challenge for the developers to fix because it has to do with the Parasolid Kernel, the foundation of the software, but it gives me never ending problems and I think often will cause crashes.


                              Other software such as Pro or Inventor do not have this problem.  SW users have heard rumors of a dual-kernal solution, which gets us all giddy, but nobody knows if and when a solution will ever be implemented.  I think we can all agree that 99.9% of the time the parasolid kernal seems to be great.  But I'm a 100% kind of person as many of you are.  You aren't satisfied when there are flaws or needed improvements in your products and certainly not when it is a fundamental issue.


                              I believe that when the underlying kernel can't handle some geometry (geometry that other packages can handle, and often we try to import) this could cause a crash.


                              This is, in my mind, the preeminent flaw in SolidWorks.  I say this as someone who has tens upon tens of thousands of hours using this software and only surround myself with staff that have similar experience with SW.


                              Why do I bring this up?  First, many users don't even know what it is.  They get an error message that they can't properly section a part or assembly where they want and then don't know what to do or why it is happening.  Second, it may occasionally be the source of your crashes.  Third, I bring it up whenever I can, because this MUST be fixed.  I've been begging for over 10 years and no hint of a resolution is anywhere on the horizon.


                              The interface in 2016 has become a major issue.  Why?  Because every single user understands it on some level and can make a judgement whether they like it or not.  Other, more deep-rooted issues, such as ZTG inflict pain upon the users without them even knowing or understanding what is happening.


                              So, yes, everybody is complaining about the frosting on the cake, but don't even understand that the cake itself has major problems.  In this case, SolidWorks's cake was made with gluten-free flour, not regular flour like the other CAD packages.  And if you've ever tasted anything gluten free, well you know what I'm talking about.


                              But, too many people are busy licking the frosting and haven't even experienced the cake itself yet.

                              • 148. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                                Bob Van Dick

                                This interface wouldn't even pass for gluten free....

                                • 149. Re: SOLIDWORKS 2016 User Interface
                                  John Stoltzfus

                                  It would after it's a digested heap..

                                  8 9 10 11 12