FYI - 2024 SP04 is now available for download

[TRKemp]

I typically wait until SP05 - but we have some new workstations going in, so it's forcing my hand. Just thought I'd pass the word if anyone's been waiting for the next iteration. I'll report back if anything major pops up after we've had some time on it.

[retonny77]

Thanks for the heads-up! I usually wait for the next one too, but sounds like a good time to upgrade.

[Bradfordzzz]

Since we are dropping Solidworks support .. I'll be watching this very closely because its the last one I will be able to get.
I only have until Sept. 30th

[AlexB]

Since we are dropping Solidworks support .. I'll be watching this very closely because its the last one I will be able to get.
I only have until Sept. 30th

You have up to whatever service pack is released until you end your subscription service, whether you download and install it or not. Just get it from your VAR if you ever want to upgrade after your service ends. They still support former customers to make sure they have access to the install files of their latest eligible service pack.

[Bradfordzzz]

You have up to whatever service pack is released until you end your subscription service, whether you download and install it or not. Just get it from your VAR if you ever want to upgrade after your service ends. They still support former customers to make sure they have access to the install files of their latest eligible service pack.

Thanks Alex, That takes the pressure off for sure.

[SPerman]

Why not go ahead and download it? It's there if you need it, and if not it's just a little server storage.

[Bradfordzzz]

Why not go ahead and download it? It's there if you need it, and if not it's just a little server storage.

I have downloaded it. Just didn't want to install it until I heard some feedback. We are currently on 2022 SP5.

Got burned before with not being able to mirror for 6 months which is a very huge problem when you work in automotive.

made me very trigger shy on updates.

I know some people have to upgrade to keep up with their customers, so I am just watching this thread for any holy $hit problems.

[SPerman]

I get it. 2019 was the wake up call for me. After the upgrade, "Solidworks is busy" about 90% of the time.

Make sure you download the full set of files, not just the installation manager.

[AlexLachance]

I get it. 2019 was the wake up call for me. After the upgrade, "Solidworks is busy" about 90% of the time.

Make sure you download the full set of files, not just the installation manager.

2019 stung quite a few people

[bnemec]

2019 stung quite a few people

Stung us bad.

It's the only version we've used so far.

[AlexLachance]

Stung us bad.

It's the only version we've used so far.

Stung us bad too, took 4 years for me to be able to convince my boss to move to 2023, and I believe we mostly did it because we wouldn't have had support for both SolidWorks and CustomTools.

We're on 2023 SP4, might move to 2024 SP5 once it's out if it sounds nice, will see.

[Bradfordzzz]

Stung us bad too, took 4 years for me to be able to convince my boss to move to 2023, and I believe we mostly did it because we wouldn't have had support for both SolidWorks and CustomTools.

We're on 2023 SP4, might move to 2024 SP5 once it's out if it sounds nice, will see.

Alex .. you need to test 2024 SP4. Its your turn buddy.

[AlexLachance]

Alex .. you need to test 2024 SP4. Its your turn buddy.

If we had moved to a prior version of 2024, I probably wouldn't mind. It's the process that is demanding, rolling out the update on 15 workstations is quite a task. Also has to be done on a day where everyone's off besides me, also needs to be synchronized with some folks over at CustomTools for assistance during the update. Updating to a SP is much easier, one at a time at any moment that is best for them and me, not too long, don't need to rely on others.

Maybe if 2024 SP5 is decent I'll be one of the first on the earlier SP's of 2025. They were pretty relentless about convincing me to keep up to date when I went over to see them in Waltham

[SPerman]

We are currently on 2022 SP5.

I wouldn't be afraid of going to 2023 SP5. It solved some issues for me, and I think most of the people who upgraded are happy, although I think some people have less issues with SP4 than SP5.

[RichGergely]

Well I do know one thing. Yes the saving to previous versions is a blessing but it is also a painful bind. Saving 2024 files to 2023 you have to be really careful with the hole wizard or it won't be compatible. It's so easy to trip up every time you use hole wizard, you forget to untick one box and it's stuffed.

The unsurprising thing (for SW) is once you have not followed the exact process you can't go back and change it, you have to delete the hole wizard feature and put a new one in.

Doing a large tool design sooner or later you will forget to do the correct process for 2023 compatibility, it so easy to do. Then if that drives other features you can see where this is going............ You need to delete the hole feature and then reassign all the other features.

[HercalloY]

Looks like SP4 finally fixed the "CAD Family" issue (where opening some parts would result in the Configuration Tab turning into the CAD Family tab and not let you get into the Custom or Summary tabs in file Properties either so you couldn't view/edit file properties or see file creation/last saved dates). At least.. with the two files i had ear-marked to check, it worked as expected finally.

[Jim Elias]

Well I do know one thing. Yes the saving to previous versions is a blessing but it is also a painful bind. Saving 2024 files to 2023 you have to be really careful with the hole wizard or it won't be compatible. It's so easy to trip up every time you use hole wizard, you forget to untick one box and it's stuffed.

The unsurprising thing (for SW) is once you have not followed the exact process you can't go back and change it, you have to delete the hole wizard feature and put a new one in.

Doing a large tool design sooner or later you will forget to do the correct process for 2023 compatibility, it so easy to do. Then if that drives other features you can see where this is going............ You need to delete the hole feature and then reassign all the other features.

Untitled.png

Yes, this previous-version-save thing has turned out to be a lot less cool than I thought it would be. A proper implementation would have been to e.g. actually have emulation modes that then lock out all that stuff which would block a past-version save.

[mp3-250]

Well I do know one thing. Yes the saving to previous versions is a blessing but it is also a painful bind. Saving 2024 files to 2023 you have to be really careful with the hole wizard or it won't be compatible. It's so easy to trip up every time you use hole wizard, you forget to untick one box and it's stuffed.

The unsurprising thing (for SW) is once you have not followed the exact process you can't go back and change it, you have to delete the hole wizard feature and put a new one in.

Doing a large tool design sooner or later you will forget to do the correct process for 2023 compatibility, it so easy to do. Then if that drives other features you can see where this is going............ You need to delete the hole feature and then reassign all the other features. o[

Untitled.png

I really don't want to say it, but I said it would end like this... given the past experience of incompatible features etc.

[RichGergely]

Well 'IF' they actually did it properly and you could just select to run in a compatibility mode for either 2022 and 2023 then all would be 100% great.

But what they have done is left you to do that job while implementing new features, like in the instance of hole wizard, which default to non-compatibility and unfixable without deleting the feature.

We pay our subscription costs but I am guessing a lot of that money is syphoned off for the new online cloud stuff.
I see this problem as simply not enough money spent on implementing, more man hours were needed to make it what it should have been.

[HercalloY]

Looks like SP4 finally fixed the "CAD Family" issue ...

I take it back. A second file i tested (after the initial single file quick test with a file i could remember easily) still has the bug. 50% strike rate? I think that's good when it comes to SW bugs (i want to laugh... but i just can't bring myself to at that joke).

First file was last saved in SW2020 where as the second was SW98.

[AlexLachance]

I take it back. A second file i tested (after the initial single file quick test with a file i could remember easily) still has the bug. 50% strike rate? I think that's good when it comes to SW bugs (i want to laugh... but i just can't bring myself to at that joke).

First file was last saved in SW2020 where as the second was SW98.

Try doing a few of the right click updates on the file, see if that fixes it. Make sure to keep a back-up in case it doesn't and goes bonkers.

[SPerman]

That was going to be my suggestion as well. Are you sure this isn't an older part that needs "Upgrade custom properties" to be run?

[HercalloY]

Both files need cosmetic threads and properties to be updated. One works, one doesn't (so IMO that shows that not being updated is not a direct cause at least).

This happens upon open. Its already like this as soon as the part is opened. SW's "converts" the file to something to do with 3Dx crap upon open and the Properties dial tabs are missing as shown.

The "Update Custom Properties" option is also missing from the right click menu when this occurs (the cosmetic thread upgrade option remains).

[TRKemp]

Something i noticed right away in this version - maybe its a graphics / performance related option someone can help me "sus" out?

This is a sheemetal cone, or loft. In this version, there are random linear graphics that appear. When depressing the scroll wheel, they dissapear temporarily, but reappear when static. They also cannot be selected, so it is not recognizing them as geometry.

Thankfully, they do not show up on drawings - that would've been a mess.

[AlexLachance]

Something i noticed right away in this version - maybe its a graphics / performance related option someone can help me "sus" out?

This is a sheemetal cone, or loft. In this version, there are random linear graphics that appear. When depressing the scroll wheel, they dissapear temporarily, but reappear when static. They also cannot be selected, so it is not recognizing them as geometry.

Thankfully, they do not show up on drawings - that would've been a mess.

image.png

Sounds like a graphic issue if they are not selectable. Do you have enhanced graphics turned on? That could be the culprit.

[SPerman]

It was either 2022 or 2023 where enhanced graphics actually solves more problems than it creates.

[TRKemp]

Sounds like a graphic issue if they are not selectable. Do you have enhanced graphics turned on? That could be the culprit.

When going to that option, i see a new one called "Hardware accelerated silhouette edges". Unchecking it removes some of those lines, but they are still there.

I also tried turning off "enhanced graphics," but they're still there.

I'll keep messing with the image quality options and see if I can find a comprimise.

[TRKemp]

So heres a short list of some things I noticed after 6-ish hours of testing.

Pack and Go seems to function as it should - tests did not yield any strange results or missing virtual components.

Updating referenced file locations for models was successful

Using the RMB "rename" tool was successful - the "include virtual components" selection did indeed update all externally referenced geometry and features of internally saved parts.

Save-As (with references) worked properly

Nothing stood out when opening drawing files, although if you use general tables, you'll need to re-establish the file location for them. SW has categorized things a bit further since 2022 evidently.

We use relative views for assemblies on occasion.. these are still a bit buggy. Tip - if creating a relative view of an assembly, open a "new" drawing template and drop your view there first. Then copy/paste it into your main drawing. The success rate improves this way of actually generating the view.

The "dangling" dimension re-attachment method is ok. The downside is that you can no longer manually drag the dimension nodes. You have to use the re-attach method from the RMB options. It takes some practice.

We use magnetic mates for quick placment of some flanged assemblies. They were very speedy and painless to use in 2022, not so much in 2024. I had very inconsistent results - but they do "work", just not with nearly the same ease as before. I guess a pro would be you can now suppress a magnetic mate, whereas you could not previously. Its good too, becuase if you suppress the assembly and not the mate, the mate "fails" and throws an red (X) error. in 2022 you would just get the yellow (!).

The ability to save your assembly as an externally referenced multi body part seems cool. I imagine I will use this at some point. Would be handy for machine stock type scenarios.

Sheetmetal flat patterns seemed to work as they should. Saving to a dxf file also gave me no trouble.

I really miss when you could just "suppress" an equation. The enable / disable function just isnt as good. Not configuration specific either... but better than nothing I suppose.

It crashed twice on me while doing mundane tasks. So thats not confidence inspiring, but I'll try to be positively optimistic.

[Bradfordzzz]

So heres a short list of some things I noticed after 6-ish hours of testing.

Pack and Go seems to function as it should - tests did not yeild any strange results or missing virtual components.

Updating referenced file locations for models was successful

Using the RMB "rename" tool was successful - the "include virtual components" selection did indeed update all externally referenced geometry and features of internally saved parts.

Save-As (with references) worked properly

Nothing stood out when opening drawing files, although if you use general tables, you'll need to re-establish the file location for them. SW has categorized things a bit further since 2022 evidently.

We use relative views for assemblies on occasion.. these are still a bit buggy. Tip - if creating a relative view of an assembly, open a "new" drawing template and drop your view there first. Then copy/paste it into your main drawing. The success rate improves this way of actually generating the view.

The "dangling" dimension re-attachment method is ok. The downside is that you can no longer manually drag the dimension nodes. You have to use the re-attach method from the RMB options. It takes some practice.

We use magnetic mates for quick placment of some flanged assemblies. They were very speedy and painless to use in 2022, not so much in 2024. I had very inconsistent results - but they do "work", just not with nearly the same ease as before. I guess a pro would be you can now suppress a magnetic mate, whereas you could not previously. Its good too, becuase if you suppress the assembly and not the mate, the mate "fails" and throws an red (X) error. in 2022 you would just get the yellow (!).

The ability to save your assembly as an externally referenced multi body part seems cool. I imagine I will use this at some point. Would be handy for machine stock type scenarios.

Sheetmetal flat patterns seemed to work as they should. Saving to a dxf file also gave me to trouble.

I really miss when you could just "suppress" an equation. The enable / disable function just isnt as good. Not configuration specific either... but better than nothing I suppose.

It crashed twice on me while doing mundane tasks. So thats not confidence inspiring, but I'll try to be positively optimistic.

Thank you for sharing all of this. Really great information here!

[TRKemp]

No problem, the file transfer performance for me is such a big key of whether an update is considered stable, so I wanted to make sure I shared that. Even 2022 SP05, my VAR had to perform a "backport" from an earlier version to install the .dll file that manages the pack and go function, since it was losing those internal component references all the time.

Im going to reach out to them today and prod them a bit on the graphics issue I'm seeing with the cone.

[TRKemp]

One additional comment:

The envelope publisher appears to be working correctly.

In 2022 SP05 when publishing an envelope group to another assembly, the "destination" envelope would not update after changes were made to the "seed" assembly, thus rendering the feature kind of useless.

I tested it in 2024 SP04 and the feature is working as intended, with the "destination" updating to reflect changes made to the "seed".

[Bradfordzzz]

Did you try Mirroring at all yet?

[TRKemp]

Did you try Mirroring at all yet?

From a purely functional standpoint, I see no glaring issues. I've mirrored a couple assemblies using different options for the mirrored geometry - external files and also my preference, adding derived configurations. No missing components or failures to note.

At a part level, I mirrored some weldment bodies with no problem, and then some features. All seemed to work as intended.

We don't rely on SW BOM's (for now) so I can't speak to the potential issues that may be lurking there.

[Bradfordzzz]

From a purely functional standpoint, I see no glaring issues. I've mirrored a couple assemblies using different options for the mirrored geometry - external files and also my preference, adding derived configurations. No missing components or failures to note.

At a part level, I mirrored some weldment bodies with no problem, and then some features. All seemed to work as intended.

We don't rely on SW BOM's (for now) so I can't speak to the potential issues that may be lurking there.

Thank you so much for taking the time to test that out. Really appreciate that!

[TRKemp]

Not a problem! Happy to reduce the SW induced anxiety in any way I can.. haha.

As an update - my VAR replicated the graphics issue mentioned prior. Its now been elevated to SW.

[mp3-250]

I take it back. A second file i tested (after the initial single file quick test with a file i could remember easily) still has the bug. 50% strike rate? I think that's good when it comes to SW bugs (i want to laugh... but i just can't bring myself to at that joke).

First file was last saved in SW2020 where as the second was SW98.

Try to save the files after opening them fully resolved.
From KB it should be already solved.

Description

SCENARIO:

1. Open SOLIDWORKS Assembly (SLDASM)

ACTUAL BEHAVIOR:
ConfigurationManager Configurations Tab is replaced with ConfigurationManager: CAD Family tab showing physical products

EXPECTED BEHAVIOR:
ConfigurationManager Configurations Tab with configurations shown

MORE INFORMATION:

Some SOLIDWORKS files are behaving as if they have been updated for compatibility with 3DEXPERIENCE randomly.

Closure Information

The root cause for this issue has been identified and corrected in the following Bug Reports.

BR10000381002 [Fixed in SOLIDWORKS 2024 SP4]:SOLIDWORKS Files having ConfigurationManager Configurations tab changing to ConfigurationManager: CAD Family

BR10000382804 [Fixed in SOLIDWORKS 2024 SP5]: Configurations - opening assemblies in LightWeight, configurations change in ConfigurationManager: CAD Family. Instead, with Resolved mode, the default ConfigurationManager is kept.


MORE INFORMATION:

You may need to open the impacted files in SOLIDWORKS fully resolved and save in SOLIDWORKS 2024 SP5 or higher to see the correction for BR10000382804.

[HercalloY]

Try to save the files after opening them fully resolved.
From KB it should be already solved.

Thanks for the additional info. These were single part files exhibiting this behavior, so i was just opening them directly (not in assemblies). I did do another test give that info. Fully saved (which in that same open session didn't change the file visually), closed and then re-opened and it seems to refresh the UI and open as normal at that second open after a save. So it does seem fixed on the files that don't open "fixed" as the first example file did. Odd.

[DLZ_SWX_User]

Just discovered what I believe may be an issue & have contacted my VAR. When you use hole wizard & close the feature the feature tree look like it always has in the past, with it's related sketches absorbed. upon saving the part, closing the part, & then opening the part back up, the hole location sketch appears to be dangling. It is no longer absorbed into the feature. The sketch is also not hidden.

I thought I may have found a fix a day earlier as I had edited the feature & then closed it and the sketch was reabsorbed & hidden in the feature. But upon opening the part yesterday AM the sketch was unabsorbed again. That is when I started getting my VAR involved.

[Bradfordzzz]

Just discovered what I believe may be an issue & have contacted my VAR. When you use hole wizard & close the feature the feature tree look like it always has in the past with it's related sketches absorbed. upon saving the part, closing the part, & then opening the part back up, the hole location sketch appears to be dangling. It is no longer absorbed into the feature. The sketch is also not hidden.

I thought I may have found a fix a day earlier as I had edited the feature & then closed it and the sketch was reabsorbed & hidden in the feature. But upon opening the part yesterday AM the sketch was unabsorbed again. That is when I started getting my VAR involved.

wow! That's a good catch! thanks for sharing.

[DLZ_SWX_User]

wow! That's a good catch! thanks for sharing.

After I had my VAR involved I had discovered this post in the SWYM: https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... vfiwNPSVFg

[TRKemp]

After I had my VAR involved I had discovered this post in the SWYM: https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... vfiwNPSVFg

I was able to replicate the issue as well.

[Frank_Oostendorp]

Damned, now either wait for SP4.1, or back to SP3.1.
For now, I do nothing, and keep working in SW2023 SP2.1.

[Bradfordzzz]

Damned, now either wait for SP4.1, or back to SP3.1.
For now, I do nothing, and keep working in SW2023 SP2.1.

Why aren't you using 2023 SP5.0?

[Frank_Oostendorp]

Why aren't you using 2023 SP5.0?

I already have all the bugs I need. Better to be slow and save with updates. Have been tricked enough.

[Bradfordzzz]

I already have all the bugs I need. Better to be slow and save with updates. Have been tricked enough.

LOL .. I hear that.

[TRKemp]

We use hole wizard too much to have an issue with it - I'm going to uninstall 4.0, install and test 3.1 and hope it isnt a big backwards step. Not much talk in the other thread about big problems, so I'm hoping this is a sound decision. I'm under pressure to get these new stations rolled out .. so thats not helping matters...

[DLZ_SWX_User]

Here is the SR number my VAR gave me if anyone wants to check it out. Or reference to it.
SR01269972-01

[laukejas]

Anyone getting constant crashes when working with Exploded View in SP4? I just reinstalled Windows and fresh SW 2024 SP4 with factory settings, yet can't do more than a few explode steps before the program CTDs

[TRKemp]

Anyone getting constant crashes when working with Exploded View in SP4? I just reinstalled Windows and fresh SW 2024 SP4 with factory settings, yet can't do more than a few explode steps before the program CTDs

Did you elevate this with your VAR? We ended up going back to SP3.1, but Im curious if you continued to have the issue.

Something I thought I'd note:

When using the new "rip" function for cylinders, SW still requires some type of sketch geometry to generate the reference for the cut. The "whats new" manual does a poor job of explaning this, leading the user to believe placing the point for the cut is contained within the feature manager. (Or at least that what it led ME to beleive )

Heres an example using a 3D sketch point to generate the "rip".

[laukejas]

Did you elevate this with your VAR? We ended up going back to SP3.1, but Im curious if you continued to have the issue.

Yes, and apparently they made a hotfix for this issue. Ask your VAR to send it for you as well, I was told it's number is QA00000367153. I'd post it here but I'm not sure if that's allowed :/