Solidworks vs proe

[jeff4136]

Treddie,


Acknowledging my own predilection for expressing my left field opinions
and desires, giving in to a weakness for often pointless debate and
reiterating the opinion that energy expended stating what 'is' would be
much more productively applied finding out what really IS thereby
(and this is the Really important point) reducing the flow (flood,
actually, where these discussions are concerned) of disinformation,
or what I like to call "eggspurt testimony".


-> "All PCs (and MACs) only support Radians"


Native processor instructions or programming (as with programs)
language functions and routines?


When is the last time you saw an engineering drawing with angular
dimensions in radians? Or any common "CAD" UI that expected parameter
input in radians?


-> This problem had me going for a good two days.


When all else fails read the instructions?
Help states: "Note: All trigonometric functions use degrees.".


-> "SGN() ... ABS()" ... (and other various and sundry relations gripes)


I can agree but let's put this in perspective (to contrast all the little
flapping hands and scowls); what other $3995.00 variety programs offer
associative equation driven curves or sweep sections or ...?


-> "will not allow vertical slope"


Same As Above. And I have a problem trying to imagine a scenario where
this is a true impediment.


Regarding this kind of 'goodie' you always have to ask:
Where's the market? Where's the profit in it for Them?


-> "the fact that it takes 10 mouse clicks ... But 99% of the time,
i just want a bare-bones copy right over the existing one."


Select the Geometry, not the Feature, Ctrl-C. Ctrl-V. MMB.
(All done. Simply amazing, huh?)


Paste Special is only required if you want a transformed copy or you
want to copy, dependently or independently, a Feature. For a Feature;
use the advanced reference collector and it's over in as little as a
single Click.


(I don't want to get started on Click Counting. I spent too long in a
low end culture of Compulsive Click Counters that are happy to wait,
literally, minutes for a feature to solve that takes Pro/E seconds.
That's pretty much across the board, not just a few isolated instances.
That is also seconds on my old computer that I can't even load the
newest versions of those resource hungry programs on, much less add
three hundred components to an eight thousand component imported
assembly then create drawings for the whole mess. They drum their
3.x GHz fingers waiting and count how many clicks they saved or call
around pricing the new computers they'll have to buy to support the
next software upgrade.)


I'm don't mean to pick on ya, bud. You were just articulate and specific
enough, in part, to warrant response. ;^) I intentionally disregarded the
(one man's trash is another man's treasure) more subjective and may have
missed some objective detail that there may be a chance of helping with.
If that be so start a legitimate topic regarding it.


(Haven't I read somewhere that WF4 has VB or VBA support?)

 

[proximo]

Jeff4136,

My only comment is this. You are smarter than me.

 

[jeff4136]

> You are smarter than me.


I'm just another set of ASCII characters out of the
ether with a little spare time on my hands.

 

[design-engine]

In my opinion it is more exciting to discuss where the software tools are going and it is too bad that the two software big guys are too busy looking at each other than getting after some innovative new ground. Not to say they both arnt doing a little bit of innovation.... I just think they are too busy looking at each other. I think thats what Plato meant when he wrote the cave allegory. Look that up on wikipedia with Pro/E and Solidworks debate.

Im asking for a mind shift.... Thats what made PTC dominate in the first place...




Edited by: design-engine

 

[proximo]

In my opinion it is more exciting to discuss where the software tools are going and it is too bad that the two software big guys are too busy looking at each other than getting after some innovative new ground. Not to say they both arnt doing a little bit of innovation.... I just think they are too busy looking at each other. I think thats what Plato meant when he wrote the cave allegory. Look that up on wikipedia with Pro/E and Solidworks debate.

Im asking for a mind shift.... Thats what made PTC dominate in the first place...

I could not agree more. Competition usually generates better products for the consumer, but if you focus too much on what the competition is doing and try to match the capabilities, you loose out on the Innovative thinking that truly drives a great product.

 

[swf-1]

The issue of cost was mentioned as a reason to switch to SW. You really need to look into this more closely. I had a conversation with my brother the other day and he mentioned that he was going to buy a seat of SW. In recent years, he worked with a local High School to have students convert his designs/drawings into a digital format. It just happens that they used SW. So he has decided to purchase a seat of his own and thatis was going to cost $7K. The kicker is he HAS to pay an annual maintenance/license fee of $1200. If it is not paid before the year is up the softwaredoesn't work. If anyone can confirm otherwise please respond, as I am astounded that this could be the case.


As a comparison, I originally purchased a seat of Pro in 1999, version 2001. At that time it cost me about $6k and would cost me $1500 a year for maintenance andupgradesto new versions. I never paid themaintenance as Icould notjustify it. I used it for a little while do some consulting, then I got on with a company that was using WF1.After using WF1 there was no way I could use2001 so it sat. I left the company a few years ago and so decided to look into upgrading my2001 to WF3. To buy a foundation advange package of Wf3 outrightwas about the same cost except that it now came with mechanisms, model check, design animation, and many other features. To upgrade from 2001 to Wf3 it cost me $2750. Needless to say, I was very tickled to get it at that price and to know that for individuals there is some flexibility on what you would have to pay for an upgrade if you hadn't kept your maintenance up.


Steve

 

[jeff4136]

> "If it is not paid before the year is up the softwaredoesn't work. If anyone can confirm otherwise please respond, as I am astounded that this could be the case"


It's not true.

 

[proximo]

If you don't pay maintenance, you simply don't get the support or new versions of the software when they are available. I don't think you get the updated Patches/Builds either. But the software works just fine.

WF is priced about the same as SW from what I can tell, but If you look at the features built in, you may find that WF is a better value. I am not sure about the latest version of SW, so please don't take this to the bank.

The one thing I do appreciate it the amount of features you can add to WF as you needs change. This is the flexibility I enjoy about WF.

 

[machid]

 

[mechanical01]

its funny to see people crying about there CAD softwares but they are still using it.

It shows how addicted they are to these softwares and without them they could not live

 

[MarkEngr]

Iturner_frl:


I depends what you're using the software for and what other components you are using (i.e. PDM software). Don't let anyone tell you SolidWorks is less expensive than ProE. It's not. And don't let the SW sales guy tell you you can import ProE files and maintain parametrics. This only works if you design hockey pucks.


I work for a design firm and have been using SolidWorksfor aboutyear (painfully).I have a list of complaints if you would like me to forward it (provide me with your email address).


If time is of any concern on your projects, don't do it. Mouse clicks are trippled in SW.

Let me enlighten the situation. Cumbersome & painful are the words for ProE concerning mouse clicks & panning, zooming, travel time,etc., as compared to SW & its lovely shortcut menus. The scroll wheel should not be used as a command termination or Enter as ProE users so admire. You can import ProE part model files with a great deal of success into SW directly, providing you have the right file format exported from ProEat hand (Parasolid 1st & Step 2nd) & are utilizing SW's excellent Feature Recognition tool. Even Native Pro files can be brought into the later versions of SW with good result utilizing Feature Works/Recognition & youare given the optionof recognizing if appropriate as a feature driven solid or sheetmetal part. Can you do that one on ProE?, please tell. SW is more successful in this regard than the other way around &I'll put money on that. For once, try it the correct way before you pass preliminary judgement. I'm not a SW reseller but a long time user on both platforms & Pro_E has a lot of catchup to do in this battle.
Edited by: MarkEngr

 

[proximo]

its funny to see people crying
about there CAD softwares but they are still using it. It
shows how addicted they are to these softwares and
without them they could not live

We keep using our CAD software because our workplace
dictates what we use. Many of us are most proficient on
one CAD Package, which may be the one we are complaining
about. Unless you take the time to learn the other and
find a new job, you are stuck with it.

Just for the record.

I am so sick and tired of Pro/ENGINEER not having the
focus it did in the past. I am about to deploy Wildfire
5 and the Pro/E 2001 UI is still lurking all over the
place. We still have features like Blend, Swept Blend
and Helical that don't support the new Dashboard UI that
was part of Wildfire 1 release.

To make things worst, in Wildfire 5, the UI of the
Drawing looks completely different than the UI of the
modeling. This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in
a software. If you try to switch between a drawing and a
model, you feel like you are using two completely
different pieces of software. The Drawing mode moved the
file menus to the right and the model mode has the on the
left. So now when I switch from the drawing to the model
and then back, I have to dance around the UI to find the
file menu because it moves around.

It's so sad I can't express it.

PROJECT LIGHTNING promises to revolutionize CAD for the
next 20 years. I have an idea. How about you simply
finish the UI of your software which is already on
version 5 and not complete. While your at it, try not to
change the drawing mode in a COMPLETELY different
direction.

OK, done with my rant.

 

[kmacfadgen]

PROJECT LIGHTNING promises to revolutionize CAD for the
<br style="font-style: italic;">next 20 years. I have an idea. How about you simply
<br style="font-style: italic;">finish the UI of your software which is already on
<br style="font-style: italic;">version 5 and not complete. While your at it, try not to
<br style="font-style: italic;">change the drawing mode in a COMPLETELY different
<br style="font-style: italic;">direction<br style="font-style: italic;">
PTC has been rolling out products in this manner for many, many years. It often takes a few revisions of the software before a certain thing is completely rolled in. For instance, WF1 began the dashboard interface (that many long time Pro/E users did not like at first and still struggle with) but it only applied to a few commands. Each revision adds the dashboard to new commands.

The word on the street is that the new drawing interface will be added to modeling in WF6, So they are keeping with their past tradition.

 

[ProE_Addict]

MarkEngr,


I admit SolidWorks has advanced a bit since my posting you referencefrom 2007. However there are still vacancies in it's abilities; including importation of ProE files. We recently has a salesman tell us we could use the feature recognition tool to open native ProE files and I'll stand by my original comment - only of you're designing hockey pucks. Advanced surfaces, multi-feature round sets and sheetmetal still have problems. Imported and converted models tend to end up messy, burdened with "extra" features SW needs for construstion and everything is unconstrained. It's almost always faster to re-build or use the "dumb" data for reverence.


ProE can open SW files, but I've never tried it as I'm sure it works as well as the tool SW has for ProE.


Until one buys the other they will never play nice.


I do still weep a bit everytime I get to use ProE and it's redefine functionality and multiple round sets...

 

[proximo]

There is no such thing as the Perfect CAD software. Heck
there is no such thing as perfect software period.

But when you are on Version 5 of your software and have not
converted the UI and features over from the previous
generation, you have issues.

Can anyone tell me one piece of software that has converted
to a new and improved UI but failed to finish the
conversion? I can't think of a single software but
Pro/ENGINEER.

 

[dr_gallup]

I was disappointed that they had not finished the job at WF2. Still not done at WF5 & now they are headed in a new direction? Fail! They obviously have poor software design tools if they have to rewrite every potion of the code individually to change the UI. The UI should just be a wrapper around the core functionality.

 

[solidworm]

there are other companies which struggle to bring their software to a new interface. some examples are ansys which has an old interface known as ansys classic and a new one called ansys workbench. most of the advanced features are only available in the classic interface and they still add new capabilities to it. ABAQUS has "abaqus CAE" interface that still does not contain all it's core functionality. some of it's functions are only accessible by writing code in a text editor.and submitting them to it's math engine using command line.
solidworks also is migrating cosmos functionality version by version into the it's own interface.
so it's not only PTC that is trying to migrate to a new interface. all of the above companies has been struggling for years, version by version.

Edited by: solidworm

 

[proximo]

@SolidWorm,

I will not argue your point and I appreciate you pointing
this out. It's true that other probably have struggles
but none are annoying and in your face as PTC.

Here is what bothers me. I am talking about core
features that have not made it to the UI. They don't
have the time to convert this over, but now I get a new
flashy reflection of my model on the backdrop and nice
looking Ribbon Interface.

Where is PTC spending their time? It sure is not to
convert the remaining elements over to the Dashboard,
since similar features have been implemented already.

I could understand of all their efforts where being used
to convert their UI to a new design, but that's not the
case. They continue to add more and more features to
each version while neglecting the attention the UI
deserves.

As big as PTC is, there is no excuse in my mind. I was
shocked when Wildfire 1 was announced only to realize
it's not a full conversion. I was amazed that WF2 still
had the old design lurking in the halls, by the time WF3
came out, I was outright pissed.

Let's add WF4 and WF5 to the mix and it's now a joke.

Just my opinion.

 

[florinfaur]

Can anyone tell me one piece of software that has converted

to a new and improved UI but failed to finish the

conversion? I can't think of a single software but

Pro/ENGINEER.

Office 2007 and Office 2010:
VBA has a different UI than Excel, Word, etc.

 

[zpaolo]

Can anyone tell me one piece of software that has converted

to a new and improved UI but failed to finish the

conversion? I can't think of a single software but

Pro/ENGINEER.

Office 2007 and Office 2010:
VBA has a different UI than Excel, Word, etc.

Talk about Windows XP: it's now a phased out product, with a long story on it's back, 3 service packs, many years of updates and fixes... still the "add new font" file requester is taken from Win3.11! And the screen control panel does not follow MS own UI style rules (try changing font size...)

Windows Vista had a mixed bag of "old style" control panels and "new" control panels with an interface that looks more like a web page

Today I took a look at Autodesk Design Review 2011 and DWG Trueview 2011... the interface has NOTHING to share with Windows, icons look like they come from Gnome, everything works in a slightly custom way.

To sum up... I don't care too much for the user interface and its "windowsness"

Paolo