mkmarizani
Mechanical
Is it possible to use Inventor 2009 on Windows 7 ? Are they compatible???
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Windows 7 and Inventor 2009
- Thread starter mkmarizani
- Start date
- Status
Autodesk Inventor 2010 and greater support Windows 7.
2009 does NOT.
There are some that have managed to get 2009 to install but have had issues with content center,vault, and other aspects of the program not working correctly. I'd stay away.
2009 does NOT.
There are some that have managed to get 2009 to install but have had issues with content center,vault, and other aspects of the program not working correctly. I'd stay away.
Why upgrade your OS but leave your design software behind? I think multi-body parts from R2010 would be enough reason to upgrade.
I believe there is a port conflict between ADMS and W7. I think there is a way around it but isn't worth the effort when you should be on subscription anyway.
I believe there is a port conflict between ADMS and W7. I think there is a way around it but isn't worth the effort when you should be on subscription anyway.
>>Why upgrade your OS but leave your design software behind?
Maybe 2009 does all he/his company needs..
Now let's see...
upgrade Windows..cost = $199.00
upgrade Inventor..cost = $5,000 to $10,000
Inventor subscription..cost = $1,500+/yr
You can upgrade the OS on 25 computers for the cost of a single seat of the most basic version of Inventor. Many companies are trying to standardize all users to be on the same OS for simplicity.
Maybe 2009 does all he/his company needs..
Now let's see...
upgrade Windows..cost = $199.00
upgrade Inventor..cost = $5,000 to $10,000
Inventor subscription..cost = $1,500+/yr
You can upgrade the OS on 25 computers for the cost of a single seat of the most basic version of Inventor. Many companies are trying to standardize all users to be on the same OS for simplicity.
I doubt 2009 does everything anyone needs, I don't know anyone who has moved to multi-body workflows who could think about having to go back. That's not the point anyway, what is your business.. design/manufacture? Then why upgrade the OS but not your tools for making money. It comes down to running a business, budgeting in your costs for maintenance or upgrades and factoring it in over say 5 years, then the cost is not an issue, it is paid for way in advance so to speak.
oh my god what did we ever do without multi-body workflows.. Come on.. I have 10K+ ipt/iam files and 2 are multi-body (and ONLY because those 2 parts require transparent and solid bodies for rendering). And I could have easily made it an assembly and not even used multi-body. 1 aspect of the program that works for you might not work or offer any benefit to others. So now you know someone who doesn't think multi-body is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I never said 2009 does everything "anyone" needs but maybe its all his company needs so why pay $1500 each year when you already have all you need to "make money" as you put it..
Its very common for companies to standardize their operating systems across the board to make IT support easier. (we did and I know many others that have too).
I'd guess this is probably the case here too. The whole company is upgrading their OS and he might have said "oh wait..the cad program we have might not support windows 7...now what are we going to do..spend $5K+ just so we can standardize an OS across the board when what we have works just fine..silly"
Just because you can justify a $7,500+ (assuming $1500/yr cost of subscription) expense over 5 years just to "hope" that next years version of a program will offer you something it doesn't now is great..but we aren't all in the same boat. I bet I could also show that your expense was just a waste of money.
I never said 2009 does everything "anyone" needs but maybe its all his company needs so why pay $1500 each year when you already have all you need to "make money" as you put it..
Its very common for companies to standardize their operating systems across the board to make IT support easier. (we did and I know many others that have too).
I'd guess this is probably the case here too. The whole company is upgrading their OS and he might have said "oh wait..the cad program we have might not support windows 7...now what are we going to do..spend $5K+ just so we can standardize an OS across the board when what we have works just fine..silly"
Just because you can justify a $7,500+ (assuming $1500/yr cost of subscription) expense over 5 years just to "hope" that next years version of a program will offer you something it doesn't now is great..but we aren't all in the same boat. I bet I could also show that your expense was just a waste of money.
Come on mcgyvr, we have both been doing this long enough to know derived parts and bottom up modelling works just fine, but you are lying if you deny multi-body master part modelling is not at least 100% more efficient.
There is no company that can't use these workflows, I am not talking about making pretty pictures with transparent solids, I work in structural and pressure equipment industries and it is equally as applicable as plastics and the like.
It isn't about hoping that next years will be better, it is about over 5 years will it be better - always. Because you will have to wait 4-5 years before it is more economical to upgrade than stay on subscription. Now you can't say that over 5 years there will be no feature enhancements that will improve productivity, otherwise you have not been using Inventor over the past 5-10 years.
You could easily justify that expense based on ROI for one feature in 5 years. To put it in perspective (I think we could use a bit of that) our charge out rate for one drafter for 2 days work is more than a years subscription! It doesn't matter how many seats you have, it is included in the cost of doing business.
I have never worked for a company that doesn't upgrade because the old product does all they need, they do it because they are cheap. It usually flows though the products they make and the remuneration they pay. You don't want to work for companies like this, they view design as an expense not an income.
"I bet I could also show that your expense was just a waste of money." I bet you can't. If you actually perform an ROI analysis the evidence clearly shows the productivity enhancements by using the most up to date tools. And I am not talking about the flashy marketing tools we never use, I am talking about the one or two new features you can't do without. Years ago it was debated about the merits of waiting to upgrade, these days all power users I come across on the forums (not this one) work off the latest release, coincidence?..
There is no company that can't use these workflows, I am not talking about making pretty pictures with transparent solids, I work in structural and pressure equipment industries and it is equally as applicable as plastics and the like.
It isn't about hoping that next years will be better, it is about over 5 years will it be better - always. Because you will have to wait 4-5 years before it is more economical to upgrade than stay on subscription. Now you can't say that over 5 years there will be no feature enhancements that will improve productivity, otherwise you have not been using Inventor over the past 5-10 years.
You could easily justify that expense based on ROI for one feature in 5 years. To put it in perspective (I think we could use a bit of that) our charge out rate for one drafter for 2 days work is more than a years subscription! It doesn't matter how many seats you have, it is included in the cost of doing business.
I have never worked for a company that doesn't upgrade because the old product does all they need, they do it because they are cheap. It usually flows though the products they make and the remuneration they pay. You don't want to work for companies like this, they view design as an expense not an income.
"I bet I could also show that your expense was just a waste of money." I bet you can't. If you actually perform an ROI analysis the evidence clearly shows the productivity enhancements by using the most up to date tools. And I am not talking about the flashy marketing tools we never use, I am talking about the one or two new features you can't do without. Years ago it was debated about the merits of waiting to upgrade, these days all power users I come across on the forums (not this one) work off the latest release, coincidence?..
- Status
