Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Creo is the worst software imaginable

klheureux said:
And if this yahoo knew anything about Creo he would know

that they basically did start over. Creo was written

around a totally new, ground up kernal. Not the old

Siemans kernal that PTC was licensing.
Click to expand...

Really? I thought PTC developed Granite Kernel itself, prior Siemens acquire UGS with its Parasolid kernel(used by the way by SW so far).

There were a lot rumors about refreshing or totaly rewriting Granite from schratch with the respect to Creo introduction, but it was all about about fake news.

and again, PTC is a slave of its own success in Big Buisness market. It seems they invest its own whole potential for development of Big Fishes demands, and lost focus on Small Buisness. Was the lesson learned? Suppose not. Example - current situation with Windchill project for Hyundai and Volvo. These are the places where PTC found gold.
 
That was what I heard from a PTC rep and others industry
insiders. That is what allowed them to drop the price,
since they did not have the license fees attached any
longer. I have also heard that SW is being forced to change
to the kernel Catia uses so look for SW to turn into Catia
lite.
 
PTC has ALWAYS written their own kernel. It's amazing the misinformation spread by VARS and associated reps.
 
PTC are in a slightly better place wrt kernel

SolidWorks users will have to decide whether to change to
the new SW using Catia kernel or stick to the old parasolid
SW. In reality anyone with legacy data may need to be
running both systems.

... they will of course be easer to use!
Edited by: moriarty
 
I think threads like this are interesting. You see a title like this, and its like driving by a car accident, you cant help but look. "I gotta read this one", Am I right? Despite all the polarizing views I do in the end think we learn muchfrom this type of talk.I am a 13 year user/administrator of Pro and I have strong opinions on this,. I've circled the wagon on it so many times, I don't even know if I agree with myself any more.
smiley29.gif
 
I was searching for a part using the file search function located above the pane on the left side of the screen (the model tree pane). I found the part, right clicked on it and chose "open, which I though meant Open in Creo. That's not what it meant and now all I see when I try to use the file search function is the message:
<h1>HTTP Status 404 - /PDMLink/netmarkets/jsp/ptc1/tcomp/infoPage.jsp</h1>
<hr noshade="" size="1">



type Status report


message /PDMLink/netmarkets/jsp/ptc1/tcomp/infoPage.jsp


description The requested resource
(/PDMLink/netmarkets/jsp/ptc1/tcomp/infoPage.jsp) is not available.
<hr noshade="" size="1">

<h3>Apache Tomcat/6.0.32</h3>

I can't make this message go away to use the search function again. No problem, I'll just exit my work, shut this POS software down and start it up again.

The hits just keep on rolling.........
 
Constraints have never worked worth a damn in ProE. See the 36 ref vertical dimension? When I tried to make this dimension it gave me a conflict with the 14 mm dim, a point constraint and two tangent constraints. The tangent constraints have nothing to do with the conflict.. The conflict is between the new 36 dim, the 14 dim, the 50 dim, and the point constraint. This situation is about as simple as life gets, yet ProE can't handle it.

The 50 dim was originally hidden behind the H looking constraint on the centerline and I didn't see it. So I spent 5 minutes trying to find the problem. If constraint conflict analysis worked right and had identified the 50 dim as a conflict I would have found the problem in seconds. Once again ProE turns a 5 second task into a 5 minute task.

View attachment 5791






Edited by: headrush
 
headrush no wonder your head hurts.... Are you Lord of the Sketch?


Larry Pitts "One sketch to rule them all, One sketch to drive them, One Sketch to bring them all, And in the failure-mode bind them all"


Thank you for proving my point.... Salad Works makes a bad Designer worse. Case in point with your sketch.


If one of my Designers sketched something like thisI would fire them.


I would suggest some training my friend, CAD Design 101



Edited by: FireWild
 
Firewild, I did not create the sketch, I was simply modifying the part.

You can make fun of me all you want but that does not change the fact that Creo and it's predecessors are highly dysfunctional. I believe your posts provide valuable insight into the mind of a PTC fanatic.
 
What Firewild is trying to say is that a sketch should be very simple. As basic as possible is taught as a best practice. All those rounds and fillets should be seperate features. I compare itcreating the part in real life. Generally, you start with a basic piece of material. A block of aluminum, a sheet of plywood. Operations done on the material in real life would be a feature in Pro. I'm not sure if that is how its officially explained, but its how my head thinks when I use it.
 
For all those that are unhappy with the software they are
currently using, I offer the following advise:

FIND A JOB ELSEWHERE THAT USES A SOFTWARE YOU ARE COMPATIBLE WITH!
 
headrush..... <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" />


You did not create the sketch thats fine, but the question is do you know better? If you post a sketch like that on this site
 
This topic has become like a heated debate between an adult and a determined 6 year old. I can bare to watch no longer.
 
HeadRush,

okay so you knew that 50 - 14 = 36 glad we cleared that up.

I hear what you're saying and it sounds like you
understand Pro/E I have experienced similar issues in the
past where the Intent Manager constraint conflict
resolution does not find all possible causes. You could
hit the Make > Ref dim option and resolve it manually.

For the most part when this happens I delete uwaranted
constraints if shown in the list and if not delete them
manually then add the 36 or replacement dims.

For better design intent the botton on point constraint
would be better suited to a collinear betw line and
centerline. It all depends on how the dims were made via
the point or the centerline.

Beginning with Wildfire 5 Dimension could keep their Dim
D## Id's and be swapped from Driving to Ref and back
again. Also the equal Dim relation can add E# E# as a
dimension looking constraint symbol to any of these
dims. They also fixed the 90deg Ellipse issue and prevented
Resolve Failures from bitching and moaning

Cheers,
Michael
 
FireWild said:
Thank you for proving my point.... Salad Works makes a bad Designer worse. Case in point with your sketch.
Click to expand...

my company has been using PRO-E for 18 years and I see plenty of sketches just like this from legacy data. It's totally unfair of you to assume that a SW trained designer did this sketch when all of us did stupid stuff like this when we first learned. I'd be downright afraid to see some of the models again that I first modeled in 1999.............

For the record, when I used SW, I always used fully defined sketches. but I greatly appreciated the ability to not have to fully define something if I didn't want to. things like company logos that get imported with a bazillion sketch entities that Pro-E wants to dimension. Or placing a DXF image of a PCB silkscreen layer onto my PCB so I can visualize where components are being placed. far simpler in SW.

it's a Ford vs. Chevy argument. SW is more than capable of doing almost everything. if it were really that bad companies wouldn't use it for their designs. one company in my current industry was on Pro-E and switched to SW. identical products in identical markets being designed on two different packages and both companies are successful. it can be done.

one cannot deny that there are many features and ease of use items that SW simply does better than Pro-E. But pro-E also does things better. Pro-E does some things about as poorly as one could imagine too so it's not the holy grail. it's a tool and there are other tools that can do the same job.
 
After writing a long post and hitting the submit button I was informed that I had entered the wrong code and should press the back button and retry. But when I pressed the back button my post was gone. Is this a PTC site?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top