someone PLEASE help ME!

Someone please help me to believe that Pro/E is better than Solidworks, because right now, this programs sux! Understand, I am NOT, a newbie to either program. I first began designing with Pro/E (r20 in 1998); and coming from Autocad, it was OUTSTANDING. I took a job using Solidworks 2004 and OMAGOSH, my eyes were opened! Well, loved working with Solidworks but found a better paying job using Pro/E.Going from Solidworks to Pro/E was like losing ur cell phone, it is just handicap. I might be wrong, but PLEASE; convince me.

This is such garbage. I suggest you quit the job
and give some newly graduatated student a break.

why do i feel like ive wasted 3 seconds of life reading a post like this?

So what's the problem? How can we help?


Maybe you can convince me that SW, or Acad are better. I'm pretty open-minded.

Wanna share what's so good with SW?


I've never used SW but I recently took a basic training in inventor and that surely didnt want me to switch from Pro/E....

Jelston,


If you are trying to start the age old war between ProE & SW users, you've set off in the right direction....


Kev


PS If the question is serious,post what you think is the major advantages of SW over ProE so that we can debate them (other than the drafting package, I'd be hard pushed to see what you think is better)

Ankarl,


Not trying to rob this post are you?


But I have to agree, Inventor is about about two steps up from AutoCAD, and roughly 135,248 stepsbehind ProE. I believe the Golden Rule for Inventor is 'Don't try to use this package to create assemblies, but all the rest is fine.'


Kev

First of all, why all the hostilities? You guys need a colon flush or something. It was just a comment. Not talking about your mom's cooking or your wife body. Geeesh!


Second, actually second will come on my lunch break...

Absolutely no hostility from my side.


I'm just curious to hear what you find superior in SW vs Pro/E in detail

Try referring to the Forum FAQs and Rules, particularly the topic entitled 'Subject headings - Be Specific'


Netiquette is pretty much the same across user groups and has been formulated for good reason. Your post smacks of 'fishing expedition' and generally wastes the time of professional users who generally don't have much of it to spare.

Lee Braden,


Understood, i really didn't think this was so controversial. I would love to civil-ly discuss this with anyone interested(maybe email to email). I would LOVE to be wrong, it would make a great job even more enjoyable.

Jelston, I think your post is placed under the right forum. This is something that interests a lot of people, definately me.


The rant and rave section is for these kind of discussions. If anyone doesnt have the time, just skip reading this section then.


Please go ahead and post what you think is the major differences between SW and Pro/E.

jelston





The debate about which is better, will never be solved, unless one or the other goes out of business. I use PRO_E and would recommend it to anyone.


Money makes the world go around, and at the end, who cares what you model with, as long as you get paid.

Guys and gals,


Can't even talk about Solidworks since it is Solid Edge that is my second life. But I guess the comparison between the 2 worlds is pretty much the same (well informed people even tell me that SE is ahead of SW so the comparison could even be tougher for you diehard ProE fans. What we do have to compare however is basic programs, not the entire stuff you can tie to ProE.


First difference is clarity of what you're getting. The basic program more or less has it all, whereas in ProEthere's always the remark that you need this or that to be able to do such and so. A classic license gives you the possibility to do share geometry between parts in assembly and make assembly features, the ability to get motion and different configurations, you can do freeform modeling, sheetmetal, raytracing and all kinds of visualisation and movies, even elementary FEA.


Second big difference is the "way things works". ProE is clearly written by programmers, SE has at least some engineers with real life experience steering things. It's hard to explain entirely but take for instance holes and bolts. The hole command in ProE is centered around generating a table of values around X- and Y- datums. SE just generates holes and you can randomly choose to locate these referring to reference planes, geometry, other holes or features or even added geometry (that is automatically turned into construction). Holes have tread and not some add-on "cosmetic" feature. When you assemble things with real holes and real threaded bolts you can set the option that threads don't cause interference when they're the same size. So when you do an interference check you only get warned about real issues (size, location, ...) and you don't have to run into workarounds.


Also in assembly, but as well in all the other modules, each part remembers where it is on the file system. Giving you the freedom to use fasteners, parts from other projects and so on, without creating search paths or creating huge directories where all parts are kept together. Renaming and copying is childs play. Change the name of a part at anytime, when the reference is not automatically updated there is always the possibility of doing it afterwards. If your drawing refers to the old model you simply edit the link to point to the new part - the drawing keeps alive.


Very important is robustness. As a designer I'm in a constant evolution of how to solve the problem at hand. Doing so in ProE you have to be very carefull not to end up in a never ending "resolve" cycle. Doing so in SE features can fail, parts can have conflicting relations or may even not be found, but the assembly comes up nevertheless, with the information it has. At that moment you're free to solve whatever you want, or screw it up a bit more.


Okay, there are things I miss in SE. ProE has more advanced helical protrusions, you have a perimeter command to steer complex geometry, advanced patterning, some transition bends in sheetmetal and a few other things that are usefull at times. But reading this forum you come across lots of things that people don't know how to solve and where even veterans can only present workarounds for, where at the same time you think "this is not a problem in "SE".


OK people, now get along and shoot me ....


Alex
Edited by: AHA-D

AHA-D you... I could kiss you. You have put all my frustration into a phrase. Pro/E is apparently written by a programmer. Whereas SolidWorks, is written by someone with more practical engineering experience.

AHA-D,

When was the last time you saw Pro/E, 1994?

It wouldn't matter if AHA-D was using Wildfire3.

molsson said:

AHA-D,

When was the last time you saw Pro/E, 1994?

Click to expand...

Last WORKED with Wildfire2 in my last job that ended february 2007 ...


By the way, I'm not saying that ProE is no good, just saying it isn't the best tool in all cases. Calling it professional because you need at least 6 months to get the hang of it says more about the professionalism of the people using it than the professionalism of the program. What I dislike the most is the lack of flexibility. As a designer I change my views while working and assembling and that's where I loose time with ProE. Another example : one of the previous jobs I did - and where I learned ProE -was coax connectors. In one of the designs I had a revolved protrusion for the plug, made a lengthwise cutout for flexibility that I made cut both sides, creating to halve, bendingcilindrical parts. Calculating bending resistance I concluded that I needed more cuts. But you couldn't pattern it around because there was no angle parameter. So off you go modifying the feature. In SE it doesn't matter how you created a feature and how you constrained it, you just say how you want to pattern it and what references the pattern has and off you go.


I've always wanted to do a design contest with some die-hard ProE fans, running through day-to-day issues : creating parts, assemble them, make drawings, change features and design afterwards, throw out some parts and exchange them for entirely different things and so on. I was pretty sure that I would be drinking coffee watching the other side wrestle.

Sorry jelston - cant help you. Besides: AHA-D is talking about Solid Edge, but I think it is relevant for both SW and Inventor.


Dont mean to poor gasoline on a obviously sensitive topic as this. Im interested in others opinion on the never lasting discussion "what CAD-system are better", but I think the discussions are lacking some depth. Its alwaysseems to be about "number of functions & options". But, what does the individual need to get their job done? Things are happening rather quick also - are the categorical statements that are made up to date? Do they haveany workingexperience with the latest versions. Look at Inventor 11 - it has developed much since Inventor 9.


I'm using WF2 and the modeling is OK. I basicly dont need much more than the protrusion and revolve functions. Every thing I model has to be broken down into steel plate details and to be presentet in shop&assembly drawings. So the drawing modules in the different programmes are of interrest for me. And on drawings ProE really is behind the others. I changed employer and got to use both SW2005 and Inventor prof10 and I was very impressed with their ease of use and I was up and running very quick. Especially the drawing modules was a pleasant acquaintance to make. (I returned to my previous employer for other reasons than Cad;-))


I seriosly think that both Inventor and SW (and probably SE that I dont knowmuch of)has more to offer me, in my kind of work, than ProE.


I FULLY RECOGNISE THE MODELING ABILITY OF PROE. But I'm never to model a vacuum cleaner or office chair or something that need full blood surface functionality in this job).


(to keep it simple I didn't mention PDMLink/Autodesk Vault/PDMWorks)


Now - line up and shoot me

Knut Fiskerg