【转帖】is sw 09 the most unstable version yet, or is it me

yang686526

is sw 09 the most unstable version yet, or is it me?
first off, 4 computer specs:
dell precision 390
intel core 2 2.66 ghz
3.25 gb ram
quadro fx 3500
   sw certified driver:
we've not jumped from v2007 yet, but our plans were to go to v2009 as soon as it seemed a rational thing to do.  watching threads like these to survey stability, bug issues, etc.
  
jeff mowry
it seems that if you want each version to be stable, you need to upgrade your hardware also.
i don't know if i ever will get past 2008.
chris
solidworks/pdmworks 08 3.1
autocad 08
software initial costs + continual maintenance costs + continual hardware upgrades = expensive.
i haven't received sw09 yet so cannot speak from personal experience, but from what i read at the solidworks forum, 2009 is one of the better versions so far ... but it's still early days yet.
just out of curiosity, did you install from the discs or a download?  my var said that i should get my discs by the middle of this month, but i haven't seen them yet.  i'm not exactly champing at the bit, but my system has been way too stable lately, so i thought that i'd try to screw it up...
dan
flores,
you state 3.25gb ram. how is that divided between the ram slots? are the slots coloured?

cbl
from what i had read in the forums, this sounded like the most stable release yet, which is why we went ahead and jumped in with both feet on sp0.
eltron,
we used discs.  we actually have 5 seats but 1 of them is for the pdmworks admin and i know his system is not up to specs.  these sw forums are usually the first place to go to for help or recommendations with sw problems, but we may have to contact our var and use some of that money we pay extra for
cbl again
i right-clicked "my computer" > properties, and read what was on there.  i will have to wait until monday at work to see how the ram/slots are split up.   
i'm really not sure, but i thought i read somewhere that the ram sticks should be spread evenly across the slots so that each core had access to equal amounts of ram, i can't find anything on that though. maybe it was for multiple cpus not multi-cores.

cbl,
he has 4 gigs of memory on an x32 bit system.  it will only show as 3.25 gigs installed under computer > properties
cheers,
anna wood
sw2008 sp4.0, windows vista sp1
ibm thinkpad t61p, t7800, fx570m, 4 gigs of ram
doh ... of course. that makes sense.