someone PLEASE help ME!

[Denny Ehlers]

Jelston


I'm a Design Engineer working in mostly the metalworking field, particularly weld cell robotics, and I've tried Autocad (10+ yrs.), SW, and currently Pro/E (7+ yrs.).


It may take some getting used to, but nothing compares to Pro/E.


SW is not nearly robust enough. And I don't care for the interface.


And Autocad is barely a step above Etch-A-Sketch.


'Nuff said.

 

[CBUI]

FILL SO BORE TO READ YOUR

 

[molsson]

I actually started to write an answer to AHA-D, but then it struck me that this is the old 'my dad is stronger that your's' discussion, so I just wont bother.

Whatever makes you happy.

 

[AHA-D]

There's only one "decent" conclusion and that is "keep your eyes open". There's no such thing as an ideal tool. Like in cars there are types that are faster, cleaner, stronger, less consuming ... there's also different kinds of CAD, with different approaches, possibilities, interfaces, ... You have to take what suits your needs best.


But the worst you can do is stop looking around.


I had the fortune of twice getting the opportunity of making a complete survey of the field in choosing a first system for the company, and a replacement when the first one was stopped. That kinda gives you a broader view. At no occasion we decided on demos but gave real life exercises to be solved. For some systems the real life test was the "killing zone".


Whatever CAD you're using you decidedalong some criteria, often not even yours but that of the bosses that never have to work with. And it was sold primarely because someone wants to make a profit, not to make your life beautiful. I've hardly met any salesperson in my entire life that would give an honest view on the things they proposed (and when someone said "don't buy this" is was clearly surprised).


Students I've met are of some guidance. They used to have ProE in my old school of industrial design, and changed it for SW because the learning phase is much too steep, and they want the students to spend time on their design and not on the software. Which is reasonable from that point of view. Last month I had 2 students-engineers in the office that had had Inventor as CAD. Explaining them how SE worked they wondered why the school chose to have half of the faculty on IV and the other (not theirs) on SE.


Learning to use the tool is equally important. I can drive any CAD system into a state that it won't work anymore. In fact, it's far easier to do this than to turn it into a lean clean mean machine. That's why I won't condemn ProE at first glance and found lots of useful things in it. It's powerfull, it has small files that load fast and has immense possibilities. But you have to learn its ways and develop the art of making it do what you want.


So if you feel comfortable with what you have, don't change. It's better to drive a bike you know to handle than to land in a ditch with a motorbike you can't handle. But if you always run late driving your bike it's not bad to look around for other means of transportation. Reading this forum is in fact a very good guidance to assess what ProE can and what it can't.


Alex
Edited by: AHA-D

 

[prohammy]

Jelston,


I think my original post points to most of what has followed (and I like the molston quote as well)


This debate has been raging since SW has hit the market. For some reason (probably CAD envy) there has developed a bitter divide between users over the merits of SW v's ProE. Can't remember where it is (think it was Eng Tips website), but one of the reports I saw recently has gone as far as counting the number of mouse clicks a user needs to perform certain tasks. At various stages, across many different forums, the issue of who's best (SW or ProE) has been beaten to deathlike a pinata at a kids party. (And now to add spice to the punch, Inventor seems to have entered the fray)


And in general the conclusion to this whole sorry debate....nobody can really say which is ultimately the top dog. Personally, I tend to have to hop between packages, because I work on a contract basis. I prefer ProE, but that probably stems from the tha fact that that is what I got my basic training on and used for the first two years. Similar to Denny, I tend to work in industries that require metalworking and ProE is more than capable for that exercise, but if pushed I can do anything that is required of me in 2D AutoCAD (just slower). The net result is that I have to produce drawings and any CAD package can do that.


So to sum up....which ever package you feel comfortable with is a good choice. Whichever will help you maximise your profits is a good choice.


Kev

 

[jelston]

Prohammy,


I was going to stop posting and call it a day until I saw:


"Similar to Denny, I tend to work in industries that require metalworking and ProE is more than capable for that exercise, but if pushed I can do anything that is required of me in 2D AutoCAD (just slower). The net result is that I have to produce drawings and any CAD package can do that."


I that's just not true! I work in metalworking and Pro/E is awkward for metalworking. (I swear I am not just trying to keep mess going)


Understand, Pro/E was my first 3-d love and it has good points, but what's frustrates me is some features have a good basis, but then it's like the programmer just ran out of time to make the feature what it should be.


Okay this is never to be solved and i'm not posting anymore (maybe)

 

[james.lynch]

I'm not going to get into it too deep but just to say I create complex surface models all day every day - andfor a curve based surfacing CAD package - it simply can't be beaten!


I'm not saying it's not without it's faults, it makes me tear my hair out most days! but also - most days I thank God, I'm NOT USING SW!

Cheers,


James

 

[eharmony]

Kudo's to some of the more experienced and open minded people trying to shed light on this age old comparison! It is certainly entertaining....


I use both SW and Pro-E "LATEST" versions almost daily. I work in the medical field and have almost every challenge fora CAD system. I am a seasoned veteran and have scene both from initial releases to the present, even going back as far as Computervision and CADDS 4X. Nobody can deny the way these tools HAVE made us better, faster and more thorough designers and that is something we should all appreciate.


Maybe we would all be better served by trying to get the "non" value added improvements isolated and costly maintenance packages (both SW & Pro) better suited for our companies to stay current and have better access to guidance. There are just too many detail items that each software would benefit from incorporating. Simply put, there are Pro's and Con's for both.


There would not be a SW if it were not for Pro-E. If you think Mechanical Engineers are creating SW software then you are mistaken and likewise for Pro-E in reverse. If the old days of Pro-E were not so arrogant and hard to deal with then SW would not have been born ( in my opinion). Sw did a major risk that paid off by offering to educational institutions free or greatly reduced and easily. PTC has paid highly for that screw up.


That being said, I am sure many veterans can see why people would like SW-CAD but at the same time smirk at why they can produce things with relative ease and stable. I have to admit I am surrounded by both user groups at work and definately see frustration on both sides. I have conducted placibo/blind experiments and have found a much faster and more importantly, betterquality, finished product from Pro-E. Sometimes the problem is just that managers don't care about necessarily right but right for right now..we can fix later mentality.


I know it sounds more like a yeah for Pro-E but I am being absolutely fair when I say that when it comes down to real precision parts/assemblies, based relations, drawings,3D machining, manufacturing, detail drawings that communicate a high degree of well details tolerances and critical features, as well as speed in the "final" end plethora of documentation. There is no contest for the complete design cycle to manufacturing, families, and ability to apply complex revisions/changes toparts.


I hated to even write that but have just witnessed ti first hand too many times. I think there is great value in SW and it has helped keep PTC "real" and not get too fat headed. Join the two and look out CAD world.. Each tool has its place and that is decided by too many variables and the time/effort people want to put into their tool to be a professional and not just a user.


My long winded 2 cents worth..


God Bless,

 

[jelston]

eharmony,


then you are the person i need to converse with. You use them both, I use them both and i just don't see why i would won't to use Pro, BUT i KNOW you can help me. Maybe, part of my problem is, i don't have anyone to bounce ideas with (which would be where you can help). I am the sole user of Pro at my company. When i started, they handed me a Pro/E box and basically i went to it. I installed everything (installation IS one of my gripes)and got to work . If it is not against forum rules and you don't mind answering, where are you located?

 

[prohammy]

eharmony,


Fantastic summation of the CAD world...if this were on Eng-Tips, you'd be getting many stars.


It was well worth the 2 cents...


'Sometimes the problem is just that managers don't care about necessarily right but right for right now..we can fix later mentality.'


That quote alone is worth a new forum never mind a new topic that could be discussed.


Kev