I hate to say it but I had a very similar experience with customer support when I had the same problem.
Every time I see their responses I research again what alternate software is available that might be better supported with the same features and similar pricing structures. So far, I am still here. I do know that they are using a 3rd party licensing client and probably have little control over how it authorizes the software. I'm assuming that to provide better service they would have to scrap that whole model which may not be viable under the circumstances.
I have found the tech support staff to be responsive and friendly to submitted crash reports and eventually correct any major bugs that I have found. The small nagging bugs not so much - (hint I really do wish I could revolve a surface touching the axis and 3d mirror objects not on the UCS plane).
At the end of the day, it is a risk/reward cost/benefit game that has brought us here. It's not ideal, but until a better alternative comes along we are operating within the rules that have been set by CMS. I do believe CMS would be better served with a more open "Friendlier" support stance but apparently that can't come for free.
.
Sad, but true!
My understanding of crash reports / feedback form, is that they go direct to the ITC support via emal - 'intellicad.org' and yes they are very helpful. Whereas CMS are very much hit/miss, atm more miss than hit.
I do not see "Friendlier" support as cost driven, any help I can offer on here is FREE , & I think I am friendly
I too wish the revolve would be sorted, as I have pulled the links to my piping utility as it uses revolve. I have tried revsurf as an alternative, but not really what I was trying to achieve,Statistics: Posted by sln8458 — Mon Aug 22, 2022 12:43 am
]]>