Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.
Yep, your right. Their is a lot of complaining going on in this forum. But I do believe this is the Rant & Rave category and the person who started it was ranting.
This forum is about how sucky PTC is and hey, I agree to a point. It really doesn't matter what you work with, it all has is good points and bad.
I believe that it is okay to complain about anything. I just think that the complaining does nothing. In general, we should be tactful, make our point and move on. I don't mind reading e-mails coming from this site or others, but I get aggravated when 4 out of 5 are complaints about how bad PTC is. I guess I just would rather be part of the soultion instead of the problem.
Ahh, yes, the solution. Well, you can't havesolutions withoutproblems and we all have them.
We can go on and on but it really doesn't matter. It's starting to sound like a bad after school special in here any how.
I think complaining is a good thing. I wish more people would do more complaining instead of sitting around and letting companies and government rule their daily lives. But that my friend is a whole other ball of wax.
This forum was one persons vent and now it has turned into the hfd36jtb and phoxoey show. I'm sure you agree as well.
I was suprised to see this post still going strong after the
weekend. Does anyone know how to unsubscribe to a post without
actually posting a message?
Well, I hate to bother you all again, but I have seen the light. Hallelujah!!! Can I get an AMEN brother!!!
Ok, enough rhetoric.
I am deeply embarassed at my support for PTC tech support. Not
neccesarily the techs themselves, as they seem to be trying to work
through this problem, but the higher ups obviously don't get the little
guy.
I recently discovered a bug in WF3 when using the new sheet metal
flange tool. If you add a flange feature, and then edit
Pro/Program, a line in the flange feature is interpreted as an "ADD
FEATURE" and Pro/Program gives you an error. The workaround is to
edit the failed program and delete all lines looking something like
this:
14.1 Add Miter Cuts Yes
By removing them, the program will accept your changes and allow you to continue on.
However, I have a number of parts that extensively use the flange
feature multiple times. As I have stated before, we extensively
use Pro/Program to drive dynamic designs. Sometimes, due to the
number, I must edit the program 2-3 times to catch all of the errors
(Pro/E will stop processing errors after a certain number, but then
pick up the remaining ones when you attempt to close the editor) and
finally have my changes stored.
Well, the tech himself has been working with me for a month or two
hoping for a fix. He has been courteous and listened to my
problem and has emailed me to let me know they are working on it.
However, it sounds like he ran into a brick wall last week. I
returned his phone call to find out that this issue will not be
rectified until WF4. This means, I either need to rework all of
these models to use a different type of wall or continue with my
so-called fix until WF4 comes out (in a year or more).
I cannot speak badly of the techs. Though they may not have all
of the answers, they always seem to try to fix the problem or find a
solution. This one is beyond his scope, so he has to pass it on
to the powers that be. Unfortunately, I am just a little guy and
there hasn't been much outcry for a fix. I am sure if a Fortune
500 company had this problem (think Chrysler or GM or subsidiary) this
would have been fixed immediately. But since I am not a big
player, I don't get my problem fixed until the masses start to complain.
I am at a loss. I have argued in support of PTC for a long
time. This is the first time I had a big problem go unresolved
and then be told there will be no fix. Why even advertise this
new feature if it doesn't work. And why not strive to correct it
when someone pointsd out the problem. It isn't like it is
something I can fix or something I did wrong. The software has a
bug and there is no intention of fixing it.
The tech did say he would submit it to see if the higher ups will persuaded, but I am not banking on it.
Seriously, many of you got it right. You probably have run into
the exact same type of response, which is why you feel the way you
do. I will not desparage the techs themselves, as it sounds like
their superiors are the ones with their heads up their arse. And
I only have a 10 lb chimpanzee, instead of the 900 lb gorilla needed to
get things done.
I actually thought it might be a good idea to post the problem under
the sheet metal forum, so others don't beat their heads against the
wall. I don't know how many people are using the sheet metal
stuff, but the flange tool is a great addition, minus the pro/program
errors. But hey, if you are not doing a dynamic part, it works
great.
I think I will do that, without all of the rhetoric.
I'd have to agree with you on tech support. I've trained many of them on technical support calls to get them up to speed to discuss my problems. I'm sure many others would agree. Visit this forum first, ask your friends, talk to your dog and then call tech support.
I've been on Pro since '94.My company recently decided, due to demand, we would need to begin support clients with SolidWorks. Or, as I like to call it SolidCompromise. There are few things I like (my list is up to 8 now with the sectioning tool at the top).
Here are my observations:
There is no Redefine in SolidWorks. If you working a model with a lot of features and need to delete one, the only option is to delete all your children!
It takes twice or moreas many mouse-click to do things.To constrain a square across center lines is two picks on Pro and 6 in SolidCompromise.
--
I've already told my manager to add 25% to my time if a client wants SolidWorks.
You can purchase Pro for the same price. I'm not sure what the drive is...
Well, I was just thinking about companies that only have solidworks and the reason that they do is to cut costs (last time I checked they were the same, not sure of the argument.) anyway, companies that use cheaper CAD packages - wouldn't they tend to have lower wage rates? I'm think of smaller companies out in the middle of no where.
Mr Addict, maybe it's because it's friday that I don't see clear but it seems perfectly logical to me that if you delete a cut you can no longer fillet the surfaces that were created by this cut.
My example is crude, I admit, but say for instance youhave redesigned the opening to the rectangularshape but still requirethe radii on the rectangle.
In Pro. you have the option to correct the feature set for the children. In SW, it's just gone and you have to do it, and all other related children, over from scratch.
I usually end up making a copy of my SW file before any change to I can track back through the model feature by feature to create failed features.
hey guys! i am user of pro/e for last 5 years. i have used catia also(2 years). i am familiar with ug, solidworks, inventer etc. this is my opinion for the cad packages. if an engineer working on cad package knows where his design should go and how it will proceed by each step, then he is meant for pro/e otherwise uase any crap cad.
i understand with term "pro" in pro/enginner name as "post" one who knows the next steps.
well catia has good points, but, pro/e isn't bad either. the best things about pro/e i like is variable section sweep & swept blends. in past job i modeled hooks, these were great tools to do the job. on other hand in catia, i had to do so many small surfaces and then finally connect to achieve the result.
nowdays, i use another good set of tools, extmerge extcopygeom etc. these are also great in making a stable product with many parts in it.
in nutshell, one has to explore the possibility of each software to full extent before making any comment. i explored catia with pro/e & found that my guess was right. and the machining in pro/e isn't bad either. there are alot of improvments to be done (as compared to ug and delcam, but they lack on other things) but i see the good part that ptc is trying to accomplish that.
ptc sucks, but others too, dassualt systems, eds tech all are same like ptc. some are better for few months starting but when the time passes the support team give more time to newbies.
and i think there is difference in salary on the basis of cad software being used. i think catia people are paid more but it depends upon profile and company also.
Why would someone get paid more using different pakages? I don't think it has anything to do with the CAD package itself. I think it must have something to do with which company uses what. Some companies pay more than other, I'd like to know what kind of businesses pay more with what CAD package. There might be a tried, or might not. Maybe the data will say that companies that use Catia tend to be companies that have higher saleries or maybe Pro/E. I think this information would be helpful because if Catia users get paid more than Pro/E on a average then I'll have to pick up a copy
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
