1 2 3 First Previous 148 Replies Latest reply on Oct 23, 2018 3:09 PM by S. Casale

    Hype your Enhancement Request

    David Mandl

      Given that votes from the users through the Customer Portal are one of the primary criteria that SW's developers use to prioritize new features, it feels like it's in our best interest to drum up support for our favorite wishes.

       

      Sure, we also have the SWW Top Ten threads (which, btw, I never was able to view for reasons I don't fully understand), but any avenue for user feedback is a good one.  Let's use this thread as an excuse to hype up an Enhancement Request and (if we're lucky enough) help gather enough votes to make some of them show up in a new release.

       

      Include the ER# from the Customer Portal, a description of what it is, and why it's a good idea.

       

      For me?

       

      ER:  1-13112901344

       

      Summary:  Maintain Dimension and Annotation References for Named Entities (Named Surfaces, Named Edges)

       

      Why I want it:  Named Entities work pretty well for maintaining mate references (and other references) in the solid model, so I'd really like to see them work for annotations (in the model or in drawings) as well.  As it stands, you still need a persistent ID for your leaders to re-attach, so unless you've done a Save As copy of a component you're replacing in an assembly, you're going to have dangling leaders to replace.  It's a mild annoyance, to be sure, but it's also quite a hurdle for my attempts to automate more of our drawing customization processes at my company.

        • 1. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
          Paul Risley

          Surprised this doesn't have more shares.

           

          Mine is:

           

          ER: 1-14181861226

           

          The ability/ functionality to turn off the "with thread callout" box permanently and for all time on the hole wizard.

           

          I put alot more detail in the ER than this, but seriously one change to a hole and poof you got these little bastards all over your drawing. Grrrr.

           

          Ok, so as soon as I get an SPR for this I will post that number here. Forgot about the process apparently.

          • 2. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
            David Mandl

            Forgot about this post.  Thanks, Paul Risley for bringing it back up.

             

            My ER has an SPR associated with it, which I'm pretty pumped about:

             

            SPR 1027130

            Summary:  Maintain Dimension and Annotation References for Named Entities (Named Surfaces, Named Edges)

            • 3. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
              Todd Blacksher

              Not really an Enhancement Request, just a "Please Fix This" - SPR#588882

              I don't use it much, but it is going to make part of my slugme presentation a little bit interesting if it doesn't get fixed by then . . .

              todd

              p.s. It is pretty funny if you are just playing around with it . . .

              • 4. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                Paul Risley

                Ok so there was an existing SPR out there for this. GO figure since it hard as hell to find by just searching by terms.

                 

                While reviewing this request we have determined that this enhancement request has already been identified in our system as an existing Software Performance Report (SPR).  What this means is that our development team will be evaluating the request for possible inclusion in a future version of the software.  The SPR’s reference number is: 983399, "Add abaility to set individual default settings for end condition for individual hole types & also to remember or turn off 'WITH THREAD CALLOUT ' settings for each hole type".

                 

                So this is where I am going to vote. Whether or not it will address the ability to permanently turn it off or not we will see.

                • 5. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                  Dan Pihlaja

                  1-13465889618

                  allow for the display of  Dual units for mass properties

                  Explanation: We use both Imperial and metric units here.  Sometimes, I switch between the two.  Sometimes we will have both in an assembly. On the BOM (and title block), I want to let the reader know what units the mass is in, but if I specify a unit in the drawing and then later change the unit in the part, it will now show the wrong number on the drawing based on the units displayed.

                   

                  The entire units thing in Solidworks related to mass and volume are a mess.  Yes, you can set it, but why won't it list the units you are using on the BOM?

                   

                  Linked to SPR:

                  596405

                  allow for the display of  Dual units for mass properties

                  • 6. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                    Dan Pihlaja

                    Not mine, but I voted for it:

                    1-13864808506

                    Ability to open any drawing as detached without having to first save it as detached drawing

                    Explanation: I use many large assemblies that I need to create drawings for.   This would not only streamline the process, but would help in reducing the number of files that need to be deleted later.  Error proofing.

                     

                    Linked to SPR:

                    659327

                    Ability to open any drawing as detached without having to first save it as detached drawing

                    • 7. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                      Dan Pihlaja

                      I think that the amount of replies here, given the amount of time this thread has been in existence, shows how many users actually use the enhancement request path. 

                       

                      I honestly think that it is either a general unknown, or it is too much of a pain in the butt.

                      When you experience an issue with the SOLIDWORKS software, do you search the Knowledge Base for an answer?

                      • 8. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                        Paul Risley

                        I would agree on the pain in the butt.

                         

                        I try to find the workaround for most issues I encounter simply for the fact that the process for finding SPR's and the whole works is such a headache to begin with. Prior to submitting an ER I always search the database for open SPR's that might cover what I am looking at. Unfortunately as stated  above the search is not always effective at finding an SPR close to what you are looking for.

                         

                        What would be nice is if there was a direct link into the forum and your profile here for SPR's to be able to search and collaborate with others.

                        • 9. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                          Jim Steinmeyer

                          To the Pain In The Butt I would add that from the crickets chirping at Dassault, we don't know if they take the enhancement requests seriously of not. So why create one if there is no action taken or even acknowledgement that it has been received.

                          • 10. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                            Dan Pihlaja

                            1-14244890546

                            Provide ability to add a hole callout regardless of Drawing View ( side , section )

                            Explanation: I use hole callout all the time.  And there are occasions where I need the hole called out in the side view rather than the top down view.

                             

                            SPR linked:

                            585038

                            Provide ablity to add a hole callout regardless of Drawing View ( side , section )

                             

                            • 11. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                              David Mandl

                              In all honesty:  I'm not sure what to make of the comments here about the ER/SPR process.  A few of my own thoughts:

                               

                              1. I get the frustration if you can't find an SPR in the KB, to an extent.  I've have very good luck improving my search criteria by double checking in the help files and/or other documents (like What's New) to see if I'm using the correct terminology.  Maybe it's just me, though, but that simple tip has gone a long way for me being happier with my search results.
                              2. Attaching yourself to an existing SPR is better than an ER, if only because of the fact that it exists means that someone else come up with the same issue in the past.  If I have something that I think is ER-worthy, and I can't find an existing SPR, I'll usually find a way to bring it up to my VAR's support team and hope that it's something worth them escalating it to SW on my behalf.
                              3. I've created a fair few ERs, and only once have not had it turn into an SPR.  Whether SW just creates the SPR and no longer has much visibility for the issue is up to them.  But in lieu of *crickets* out of them, I can at least see that the SPR is created through the customer portal.  Where it goes from there I guess is up to them and whomever stumbles across it in the KB.

                               

                              For what it's worth, I think that the VAR support teams get a very good overview of SW's development process and how they use the votes on SPRs to prioritize their bug fixes.  Might be that it should be something they do a better job educating the user community on as well.

                              • 12. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                                Austin Broeker

                                SPR 488068

                                "Arrowhead is not attached to radial edge on inserting new branch"

                                 

                                I didn't create the original ER, but I hope they implement a fix soon because I'm tired of this crap:

                                 

                                • 13. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                                  Jim Steinmeyer

                                  David,

                                  I understand that some of the complaints seem trivial for the more knowledgeable members here. I like the idea of being able to improve my search results by checking documents like What's New to be able to make sure I am using the correct terminology, now if I just had the time to search all of these documents and had an index of when different features and options were added I'm sure I could improve my search results.

                                  As far as being able to see the spr results rather than hearing crickets, maybe when it finally makes it to SPR status that may help. below is a screen shot of a thread I started a while ago shortly before contacting my VAR about the problem. My VAR responded in a couple of days that they saw the problem and were sending it up the line. My VAR representative even logged on to the thread to keep track of the issue since many others were seeing the same problem. Two days ago SW responded back to the VAR that they too see that this could be a problem and they were going to alert their supervisor about the thread and maybe we will get some action. Still no SPR yet though and with 238 replys I don't think this is an issue wilt little impact.

                                   

                                  Capture3.PNG

                                  • 14. Re: Hype your Enhancement Request
                                    S. Casale

                                    Voting for this... I see a huge plus to this. Save crazy load times as well.

                                     

                                                   I know lightweight can be used, but I've only seen lightweight be more of a problem then benefit with opening files...

                                     

                                    I don't use detached drawings yet. Testing functionality to our workflow.

                                    1 2 3 First Previous