Autodesk's version of the FeatureCAM end user license agreement - Page 10
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 181 to 188 of 188
  1. #181
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    3,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2287
    Likes (Received)
    1540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post


    Now here comes the asshole inside me to make a cynical comment on the possible reason for that.
    Since your license grants you the right to own and use the current version and 2 previous releases, they absolutely had to maintain backwards compatibility for 3 releases
    ( not necessarily save-as previous, but at least open-from previous 3 ), otherwise risk pissing off the brand new "subscribers".

    So, they choose the next best thing: They pissed off all older, dongle-based FC users who were loyal customers for years.
    100% agree with you.
    Autodesk do not care for you - they just want your money.
    Simples.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    3,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2287
    Likes (Received)
    1540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    Not "what if". If your dongle fails, your screwed. There are no replacements.
    Personally, and this is only me speaking...I'd google and find me a good working crack of the version i legally have.
    And install it on a PC somewhere that doesn't have Interweb access, and leave that for my rainy day backup - so if my bought and paid for dongle fails, my livelihood isn't compromised by the bloodsucking marketing department that is AD.

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,922
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    342
    Likes (Received)
    1941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post

    So, AD can be accused of not wanting to spend the development time, but probably not deliberate version control....
    Yabut...
    That would be a potentially valid argument IF the dropping of legacy support was done in the major release after a complete re-write
    or substantial change.
    In this case however, it was done in the 2nd minor update!

    So, the development appears to have been done already!

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES MINOR OUTLYING ISLANDS
    Posts
    3,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    That's only true of text encoded files, which most are not in reality.

    It's perfectly common and normal to encode data files as packed binary, and if for example you write a struct of ints out to file as packed binary, then read it straight back in into 64 bit memory space it will be completely garbled as the offsets will just overlap. In such cases you have to know explicitly that you are unpacking int32s rather than int64s. Simplified example, but.

    And, in any complex piece of software like FC it's almost a given that there will be some amount of binary blobs in the data file, it's just inescapable.
    Gregor, think about this for a second. What goes into memory or onto disk ? ONLY 0's and 1's. That's all a computer can deal with. A file is nothing but a series of 0's and 1's.

    The file system has to deal with the structure of files, but there is no such thing as a 32 bit file or a 64 bit file. By the time an application gets its hands on any file, they are already in a form the app can use. This is why we have disk operating systems. The fact that you can send them over a serial cable should demonstrate this. Serial, what's that, a two-bit operation ?

    There is also no need for this big divide between 32 bit and 64 bit. In Irix, both types of binaries coexist fine and have since 1995. Yeah, 25 years ago. You can even mix and match, with 32 bit operations and 64 bit memory pointers. Mickey and Intel came pretty late to this party. You can bet your bippy that most device drivers in "64-bit Windows" are still 32 bit - including the ones that read disks, ahem. Example in point, how are you going to get a "64 bit file" through a 32 bit window, if the files themselves have bitness ? I would not be surprised if a bunch of the drivers were still 16 bit.

    In a similar case, PTC did a similar trick years ago. Comparison of the exact same operation in a newer and older Pro/E gave trail files for the same operations, comparison coughed up the version control headers, then substitution gave old trail files that ran in new Pro/E. Thanks for your concern for my well-being, PTC !

    Unless they have changed the program drastically so that operations are entirely different from what they were (I would not expect files from DOS Bobcad to run in a Windows version - although they could), your part files are going to be fairly consistent from version to version. Version control is the easy way to manipulate the customers.

    Software companies very seldom do anything that costs money. There's a good chance here they took the easy way, like usual, and a bit of hackery will enable older part files to run fine in newer Featurecam.

    Kind of funny aside, in most cases 64 bit operations are slower than 32 bit. What Irix did was the smart thing, using 64 bit memory pointers in 32 bit operations. The only reason it makes such a difference in Wintel is that older intel cpu's were data-starved. They were never as fast as their clock speed should have made them - an 800 mhz mips cpu is as fast as 2 ghz intel - so when they finally came out with 64 bit cpu's, they also added a bunch of registers. The big difference is NOT that they are 64 bit, but that they finally have enough storage registers to feed the pipeline. They could just as easily made a better 32 bit cpu, but that would not have sold as many new copies of - everything ! Must change everything, buy all new !

    By contrast, much of what ran under Irix 4.0 will still run fine in 6.5. The difference was not the bitness, but the interface toolkits. They didn't have OpenGL in 4.0 days, so that is understandable.

    Another example would be the DEC Alpha - remember them ? Kicked Intel's ass, so they got gobbled up and buried. In reality, x86 was the shittiest of the choices we had. So much for the "free market"

    Being cynical has the advantage of being closer to the truth, rather than accepting their hogwash.

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,834
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1345
    Likes (Received)
    1537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Yabut...
    That would be a potentially valid argument IF the dropping of legacy support was done in the major release after a complete re-write
    or substantial change.
    In this case however, it was done in the 2nd minor update!

    So, the development appears to have been done already!
    Yes, I forgot about that!

    Nonetheless, I kinda fail to see how this move benefitted AD in any way. All it did was push users to stick to whatever older version they had rather than upgrade, which was such an obvious repercussion there's absolutely no way that AD only realised that in retrospect.

    So I'm still inclined to think that the reasons were technical rather than policy driven. Maybe a push from the dev team to purge some legacy code or something.

    After all, Delcam had a lot of great technology, but they also had a lot of pretty bad implementations. I have no doubt whatsoever that the codebases that AD inherited from them must be pretty ugly.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    ...
    As tempting as it is, I'm not going to get dragged down this rabbit hole again

    But, I will agree with this wholeheartedly:

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    In reality, x86 was the shittiest of the choices we had. So much for the "free market"
    Just like Microsoft did with Windows, Intel undercut the market with low prices and dirty tactics. To the detriment of us all...

    And,

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Being cynical has the advantage of being closer to the truth, rather than accepting their hogwash.
    Everyone here is very fond of telling me what a cynical bastard I am, and I will be the last person on earth to defend AD, but in this specific case the evidence points to legitimate reasons rather than foul play IMHO.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES MINOR OUTLYING ISLANDS
    Posts
    3,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Just like Microsoft did with Windows, Intel undercut the market with low prices and dirty tactics. To the detriment of us all...
    Remember Itanium ? On the surface a total flop.

    But a stunning success at killing off all the viable alternatives to x86. Since the hogwash was coming from Intel, everyone believed it.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,834
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1345
    Likes (Received)
    1537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Remember Itanium ? On the surface a total flop.

    But a stunning success at killing off all the viable alternatives to x86. Since the hogwash was coming from Intel, everyone believed it.
    Yep, although PowerPC is still going strong in it's niche.

    Take a look at Raptor Computing if you weren't already aware of them, for a little glimmering of hope...


  8. #188
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES MINOR OUTLYING ISLANDS
    Posts
    3,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Take a look at Raptor Computing...
    A friend bought one of those (he's a PPC nut, does tenfour fox), and they look real impressive but running AIX ... whoo boy. I think he is trying to figure out how to run pre-Intel apple programs on it ?

    Too bad NeXT went under .... that was some nice stuff, in spite of Mr Jobs


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •