SP 4 available,,,won't install

  • Follow


Everyone,

Just downloaded SP4, get message "can't access Bla-bla-bla" on original disk
1.

Everything "IS" as it should be. The disk is the original, and it's in the
right drive. Browse to the file and click on it,,,same message. What a POS


Mark


0
Reply MM 7/11/2005 11:30:08 PM

Operating system? SP? etc.

0
Reply TOP 7/12/2005 1:05:59 AM


Paul,

WIN2K SP4

Just tried it at home,,,,same thing

Mark


"TOP" <kellnerp@cbd.net> wrote in message
news:1121130359.758720.87050@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Operating system? SP? etc.
>


0
Reply Mark 7/12/2005 2:23:31 AM

Working with Windows can be a real pain when things are reflected like
that.

As a pure unadulterated side note from Microsoft, they formally
announced to all their business customers as of last week that they are
stopping all support of Win2000.

One aquaintence of mine was involved in programming industrial
applications and used Windows on the strength of promises from
Microsoft to provide industrial strength solutions.  Within 2 years my
friend's Fortune 500 customers were asking what OS they were going to
move to next.

The only viable alternative at that point was Unix, and it still is the
only reliable, safe, strong choice.

Bo

Mark Mossberg wrote:
> Paul,
> 
> WIN2K SP4
> 
> Just tried it at home,,,,same thing
> 
> Mark

0
Reply Bonobo 7/12/2005 3:46:58 AM

Bonobo,

Agreed,

MS doesn't give technical computing "thought one" when designing their
"flavor of the month OS's". With XP64 here, and Longhorn just around the
corner it's goin to be a real mess soon. The thing I find hilarious is that
allot of poeple really think it's going to be better, cracks me up. XP64
will likely be slower, and quirkier. Longhorn will be a resource gobbling
pig for sure. Hardware isn't moving fast enough to keep up, and now you have
all new sets of problems to deal with. I would think it would be cheaper for
SW to port to Linux rather than keep up with all this crap. One things for
sure, they'd get allot more service life from Linux than anything MS offers.
There's going to come a time, in the next year and a half or so, when the
SW-MS situation gets so bad, folks will do anything just to be able to get
work done again. This is when Pro-E-Linux will start taking off big time.
Personally, I'll probably switch as soon as they have a fully functioning,
stable port. They're in no hurry now, but they'll see the writing on the
wall.

I've been doing CAD for 20 years. I've seen alot of really excellent
applications (Applicon, Euclid, and others) fade away or die all together
for many different reasons. Of all of them, complacency is the biggest
killer. SW has this in abundance.


Regards

Mark





"Bonobo" <bo@tilikum.com> wrote in message
news:1121140018.410966.59550@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Working with Windows can be a real pain when things are reflected like
> that.
>
> As a pure unadulterated side note from Microsoft, they formally
> announced to all their business customers as of last week that they are
> stopping all support of Win2000.
>
> One aquaintence of mine was involved in programming industrial
> applications and used Windows on the strength of promises from
> Microsoft to provide industrial strength solutions.  Within 2 years my
> friend's Fortune 500 customers were asking what OS they were going to
> move to next.
>
> The only viable alternative at that point was Unix, and it still is the
> only reliable, safe, strong choice.
>
> Bo
>
> Mark Mossberg wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > WIN2K SP4
> >
> > Just tried it at home,,,,same thing
> >
> > Mark
>


0
Reply Mark 7/12/2005 6:08:26 AM

'Of all of them, complacency is the biggest killer. SW has this in 
abundance'.

Mark,
Not meaning to hijack this thread but my take on this is that they are not 
so much complacent as self limited by the belief that the program is part of 
the mid range/level mainstream and that therefore to continue to have tools 
of similar capability to the other 2 offerings is nothing more than they 
need do....a sort of identity problem or self defeating conformity rather 
than being symptomatic of undue comfort.
 To my mind there is an unwillingness to truly extend the ability of the 
program because it steps on the toes of 3rd party add-ons and also because 
Catia should not be undermined. If there was a free hand to develop the 
program as users desire - open source Blender is an example that comes to 
mind - SW would be innovating and moving ahead and certainly not afraid to 
gut and redo the parts that don't work well. Support for Linux would be 
likely to come about and they would be taking on ProE.
 Presently they spend too much time covering bases with their perceived 
competition and in seeking to be pretty and user friendly underestimate 
users technical ability and aspirations. They cannot just top out at a level 
that will do enough to get by. If they don't set their sights on the next 
rung the product is going to stagnate and be bypassed. No amount of fluff 
will disguise inability to do the job and do it efficiently.
As an example of this SW simply doesn't cut it for ID requirements now. The 
surface tools are not up to developing products of a quality necessary to 
compete globally for the consumers dollar. Flex and deform are not tools for 
serious work, were never were going to be, and SW should not pretend they 
are and promote their use. Not even in passing as being useful for quick 
shape exploration.
Hopefully they will push pass this mentality or purge the people keeping the 
lid on progress. Having said that they still have to get a hold of the SP 
troubles because they can't afford to offside too many people who just need 
the thing to work.

neil


0
Reply neil 7/12/2005 10:33:41 AM

As of June Win2k is not supported. Time to change (note I did not say
upgrade) to XP.  SW probably did not test installation on Win2k and
they probably won't support it. Yet another excuse not to provide
support.

Just one question. Did you try a clean install and then jumping from
SP0 to SP4?

0
Reply TOP 7/12/2005 11:55:05 AM

A caution:  I have had CDs from SolidWorks which flaked out or didn't
work.  I suspect all it takes is one bad bit due to a scratch or who
knows what.

My VAR replaced the bad CD with a new set instantly.

Bo

TOP wrote:
> As of June Win2k is not supported. Time to change (note I did not say
> upgrade) to XP.  SW probably did not test installation on Win2k and
> they probably won't support it. Yet another excuse not to provide
> support.
>
> Just one question. Did you try a clean install and then jumping from
> SP0 to SP4?

0
Reply Bonobo 7/12/2005 4:20:41 PM

> As of June Win2k is not supported. Time to change (note I did not say
> upgrade) to XP.

I thought I remembered that SW 2006 would be the last release that supported
Win2k. Guess I was wrong.

Sounds like it will be real pain for me to move up to SW2006 if I also need
to change my OS. My production workstation is only 18months old and in real
good shape.(amd athlon64 3400+ ; 2gb ram ; nVidia xgl1100)

Will XP install right over the top of Win2k? Will I need to get new office
software as well-ie, excel?? Sounds like a real PITA. At least my notebook
is already on XP. I suppose I can use that to determine when SW2006 is ready
for prime time and deal with OS issues then.

jk


0
Reply jk 7/12/2005 4:38:36 PM

Don't even think of doing ANYTHING with your 'old' Win2K hard drive.
Keep it as an archive.

Buy a new hard drive and load WinXP with all the latest SP and
Updaters.  Chances are your MSOffice Pro will install on Win2000 & Win
XP as mine does.

Bo Clawson

0
Reply Bonobo 7/12/2005 4:59:07 PM

JK,

Solidworks will be supporting Win2K "through" SW2006, at Win2K SP4.


Mark



"jk" <jk_spam-not_design@surewest.net> wrote in message
news:11d7s9tkuhg2ef5@corp.supernews.com...
> > As of June Win2k is not supported. Time to change (note I did not say
> > upgrade) to XP.
>
> I thought I remembered that SW 2006 would be the last release that
supported
> Win2k. Guess I was wrong.
>
> Sounds like it will be real pain for me to move up to SW2006 if I also
need
> to change my OS. My production workstation is only 18months old and in
real
> good shape.(amd athlon64 3400+ ; 2gb ram ; nVidia xgl1100)
>
> Will XP install right over the top of Win2k? Will I need to get new office
> software as well-ie, excel?? Sounds like a real PITA. At least my notebook
> is already on XP. I suppose I can use that to determine when SW2006 is
ready
> for prime time and deal with OS issues then.
>
> jk
>
>


0
Reply MM 7/12/2005 6:48:32 PM

According to this, "After SW2006", Windows 2000 Professional will not be
supported..

http://www.solidworks.com/pages/services/SystemRequirements.html

Otherwise, SW2005 and SW2006 should be supported under Windows 2000
Profressional.

...


-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
0
Reply Paul 7/12/2005 6:48:54 PM

I considered staying with Win2000 for suggested speed increases, but
one final tidbit made me switch.

The final piece was the ease of transferring small files out side of
the normal network methods (Ethernet, FireWire, WiFi).

BlueTooth file transfers basically eliminate my need to interfere with
other running operations or to do USB Key or other transfer methods for
all but large files.

0
Reply Bonobo 7/12/2005 9:39:10 PM

Same thing here, going 3.0 to 4.0

Win XP SP 2

Eric

0
Reply Eric 7/13/2005 6:45:08 PM

Same thing here, going from 3.0 to 4.0

I turned on the logging option and it appears that the network path that I 
originally installed from is correct, but the sp4.0 error says ...

"The installation source (CD or local/network folder) for this product is 
not available.
Verify that the source exists and that you can access it. (1612-0)"

Roland


"MM" <markm@nospam.net> wrote in message 
news:3iDAe.811$_%4.690@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Everyone,
>
> Just downloaded SP4, get message "can't access Bla-bla-bla" on original 
> disk
> 1.
>
> Everything "IS" as it should be. The disk is the original, and it's in the
> right drive. Browse to the file and click on it,,,same message. What a POS
>
>
> Mark
>
> 


0
Reply Roland 7/13/2005 7:09:42 PM

It would be ironic if the O/S situation put Pro-E more in the hunt again at 
the
expense of Solidworks.
Going to Windows seemed like a good idea not too many years ago.
Bill


"Mark Mossberg" <Poundsandspammers@biteme.net> wrote in message 
news:u7JAe.948$_%4.111@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Bonobo,
>
> Agreed,
>
> MS doesn't give technical computing "thought one" when designing their
> "flavor of the month OS's". With XP64 here, and Longhorn just around the
> corner it's goin to be a real mess soon. The thing I find hilarious is 
> that
> allot of poeple really think it's going to be better, cracks me up. XP64
> will likely be slower, and quirkier. Longhorn will be a resource gobbling
> pig for sure. Hardware isn't moving fast enough to keep up, and now you 
> have
> all new sets of problems to deal with. I would think it would be cheaper 
> for
> SW to port to Linux rather than keep up with all this crap. One things for
> sure, they'd get allot more service life from Linux than anything MS 
> offers.
> There's going to come a time, in the next year and a half or so, when the
> SW-MS situation gets so bad, folks will do anything just to be able to get
> work done again. This is when Pro-E-Linux will start taking off big time.
> Personally, I'll probably switch as soon as they have a fully functioning,
> stable port. They're in no hurry now, but they'll see the writing on the
> wall.
>
> I've been doing CAD for 20 years. I've seen alot of really excellent
> applications (Applicon, Euclid, and others) fade away or die all together
> for many different reasons. Of all of them, complacency is the biggest
> killer. SW has this in abundance.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> "Bonobo" <bo@tilikum.com> wrote in message
> news:1121140018.410966.59550@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> Working with Windows can be a real pain when things are reflected like
>> that.
>>
>> As a pure unadulterated side note from Microsoft, they formally
>> announced to all their business customers as of last week that they are
>> stopping all support of Win2000.
>>
>> One aquaintence of mine was involved in programming industrial
>> applications and used Windows on the strength of promises from
>> Microsoft to provide industrial strength solutions.  Within 2 years my
>> friend's Fortune 500 customers were asking what OS they were going to
>> move to next.
>>
>> The only viable alternative at that point was Unix, and it still is the
>> only reliable, safe, strong choice.
>>
>> Bo
>>
>> Mark Mossberg wrote:
>> > Paul,
>> >
>> > WIN2K SP4
>> >
>> > Just tried it at home,,,,same thing
>> >
>> > Mark
>>
>
> 

0
Reply rider89 7/13/2005 9:05:08 PM

The only thing I can think of is there might be a Window update which
has something SolidWorks needs, if indeed the SWks CDs are OK.

I upgraded EVERYTHING on Windows XP OS & Hardware side before
Installing SWks 2005 SP0 from CD.

The later 3.1 and 4.0 SWks SPs installed and worked just fine, with
requisite insertion of CD #1, & #2.

Bo

0
Reply Bonobo 7/13/2005 10:05:38 PM

Roland,

Yep, that was my message and error.

Turns out, my 2005 wouldn't uninstall either !!!! Gave an error saying it
wasn't a valid windows install WTF !!!!

I ended up having to uninstall it manually by deleting the folders and
editing the registry, what a PITA !!! SW scatters entries all over the
registry, including HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT. Most of these are removed with normal
uninstall.

Just LUUUUUUUV that "Windows Installer". It's Sooooo much "BETTER" than
Install Shield isn't it folks ??????

Anyway, took most of a day, but I got it cleaned out and reinstalled.

Now I've found that SP4 has a bunch of new bugs (mate icon doesn't always
work, and a bunch of other mate weirdness) and I wish I'd stayed where I was


Mark


"Roland" <rhart.nospam@tolerancetool.com> wrote in message
news:11dappeq0pp7711@corp.supernews.com...
> Same thing here, going from 3.0 to 4.0
>
> I turned on the logging option and it appears that the network path that I
> originally installed from is correct, but the sp4.0 error says ...
>
> "The installation source (CD or local/network folder) for this product is
> not available.
> Verify that the source exists and that you can access it. (1612-0)"
>
> Roland
>
>
> "MM" <markm@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:3iDAe.811$_%4.690@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> > Everyone,
> >
> > Just downloaded SP4, get message "can't access Bla-bla-bla" on original
> > disk
> > 1.
> >
> > Everything "IS" as it should be. The disk is the original, and it's in
the
> > right drive. Browse to the file and click on it,,,same message. What a
POS
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
>
>


0
Reply MM 7/13/2005 11:05:16 PM

My advice wait for SP4.1 on this one!

I installed SP4.0EV and now SP4.0 it did fix some of the disappearing
drawing issues, which was the main reason I installed it as I couldn't
batch print anything reliably. There is hell of a lot of fixes in this
SP (They are bound to stuff up with this many fixes)

Just checked on the number of SPR's "fixed" = Three hundred and forty
one!  in SP4.0, I didn't count them just copied them all to excel and
let it count them for me. There were 217 in SP3.0

I was having issues with mates in 4.0ev lots of error flags but no
actual mate errors.

Still having issues with PDMWorks crashing to desktop when "include
drawings" is checked in options. I can check-in all drawings manualy --
a  bit of a pain in the ____ but workable. Note I uploaded a 50Mb
assembly and PDMWorks data to SolidWorks support regarding this on the
30 June - with Zero response regarding this since.

So I would advise if your not having too much of an issue with SP3.1
then stick with it. I'm sure SP4.1 or maybe even a 4.2 will come out in
a couple of weeks.


Regards

John Layne



MM wrote:

> 
> Now I've found that SP4 has a bunch of new bugs (mate icon doesn't always
> work, and a bunch of other mate weirdness) and I wish I'd stayed where I was
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
0
Reply John 7/14/2005 2:29:01 AM

18 Replies
98 Views

(page loaded in 0.141 seconds)


Reply: