I was bliss in my forgetfulness....

[jelston]

Why did i have to go and download a free 90 day trial of Solidworks 2009 and be reminded that everything really is easier; that the functions actually make sense; that the challenge should be in the design, not the design software!? Oh whoais me!! What is im to do when my 90 days is over???

 

[jelston]

I swear, i don't work for anything affiliated with SW nor am i getting a kickback!

 

[design-engine]

Do they got an intent manager yet in 2009? I gota play with 2009 next.... how much is that sw software now days? last I touched it was 2007 version.

 

[dgs]

"I was bliss in my forgetfulness ..."

That's how I feel every time I have to do work in SW - only in reverse. I forget how hard it is to do what I want with SW.

Sure, all the commands are simpler, but driving my model to follow my design intent? Painful. SW blocks me at every turn and makes assumptions that I cannot change.

Pro|E is harder maybe, certainly harder than it should be, but I'm in control, not the software.

 

[design-engine]

doug. That concept is hard to understand unless you have seen it preform in Pro/ENGINEER. I have done the same model in both programs so i understand.

 

[jelston]

doug. That concept is hard to understand unless you have seen it preform in Pro/ENGINEER. I have done the same model in both programs so i understand.

I've been cursed to use Pro/E everyday (but blessed to have a job) so i understand in reverse. I started using pro/e on release 20, not much has changed but the name, no real improvements. Sad, they had such potential.

 

[dgs]

Yeah, I find that most folks go "Huh?" at that statement. I can run circles around them in modeling with Pro|E though. They might be faster at initial modeling, but when the first change comes I smoke 'em.

Pro|E excels at capturing your design intent. If you think that way and build your model right, you can bend it to your will repeatedly when that last minute change comes. Oh, and it will come.

In SW, if I apply the same thinking, when the change comes, the model frequently fails and the same techniques used to create it won't work and I have to build it differently. Then, the next change comes and the new technique doesn't work and I have to rebuild it the old way. Infuriating.

But, each re-build is easy, though.

 

[Kevin De Smet]

Of course that's only in comparison to Solidworks, compared to most other applications then Pro/E isn't that bad

 

[zpaolo]

Of course that's only in comparison to Solidworks, compared to most other applications then Pro/E isn't that bad

So it looks like many people actually like the interface of SW, I mean from an aesthetic point of view. I've always found it too childish, cartoonish, and too colorful (my eyes hurt when I see all those flashy icons), but I'm also a fan of the "no-icons" interface of Lightwave 3D so maybe my opinion is not unbiased

Paolo

 

[dgs]

I too find that the SW UI seems a bit immature looking. But, the Pro|E UI looks raw, unfinished or as if it was designed by someone who didn't really know UI design. It doesn't lend one to believe that it's a quality product. At least the SW UI is cohesive and consistant.

A common mistakke that design engineers make is assuming that function trumps 'feel' or emotional reation. Absolutely untrue. We are emotional creatures and our emotional reactions and interpretations play a large role in our perceptions of a product.

The SW folks seem to understand that, PTC doesn't.

 

[jelston]

Funny, u say the interface looks child-like and i can actually agree. But when i render I actually get a finish that looks like stainless steel, or brass or whatever metal i choose. Can't really say the same for Pro/E.


Doug, i, of course, have the exact opposite POV (just like with my wife, scary!!) When i have to redefine, (I do mucho tubing/piping type models) it urks the hell out of me that i have to go activate each part for the update to happen. And then if have to replacea part, that will cause me all kinds of hell. This all probably sounds scatterbrained and it would get worse if i continue.


oh yeah, women are emotional, men are practical.

 

[design-engine]

Rendering has always been a soar SORE point for me. When I go out teaching workshops, I always get an industrial designer who traps me and asks WTF is up with the rendering package in Pro/E. I hate to squirm.... but WF5.0 is to be the about face we have been looking for. Haven't upgraded yet and did not touch it in the beta test in November.

Oh. I found the PTC interface designer on linkedin. I book marked her. I bet she has her hands tied and cant push for new more appropriate iconography because of her manager... (speculating).

"men like shiny things too!"
Edited by: design-engine

 

[tomlewis]

You all go on and on about the 2 software packages. I have
been using ProE for sheetmetal (& solid modeling) since
release 12. I was recently forced to use SW as an interface
for Amada's Dr. Abe for BendCam. In order to use SW, I had
to be trained. The trainer asked for some of our most
difficult parts. He is a veteran SW Instructor (6 years)
and he spent hours on a lofted sheetmetal part in SW
unsuccessfully. I can make the same part in ProE in under 1
hour. The ProE sheetmetal package is superior to all others
I've demoed. I also prefer the solid modeling. I design
"top down" and it is the best for capturing design intent.
My vote is for ProE, 100% of the time.

 

[SW]

Tom,

Can you post the part or an image as an example? It would be good to get some facts into this perpetual debate. If the part is confidential, a different part using the same modelling techniques would do nicely.

Sam

 

[tomlewis]

This is half of a floor trough for a commercial kitchen. It
is sloped toward the drain and has 2 light creases in the
bottom to facilitate drainage.

 

[tomlewis]

Here is a left facing view

 

[design-engine]

since the fourm lost some posts I thought I would kick this in again...We did a shootout for proving form using Solidworks like we do in Pro/ENGINEER. Robust modeling etc.


In our Solidworks vs Pro/E shootout I was running Pro/E with Chris Thomson from this forum. We ran against several of my past students. http://proetools.com/category/blog You can post your comments below the article
Edited by: design-engine

 

[design-engine]

I am speaking at the BADGERLAND Pro/E user conference comparing Pro/E to Solidworks. I speak after lunch so if your in Wisconsin come on over and pick up on some of them fine eats.

http://www.badgerug.com/meetings.php

 

[Mindripper]

I have been using Pro/E since Release 17 (1997) ans SolidWorks since 1999: I have at least six man-years on each system. SolidWorks is much easier to learn and use. It is also much easier to edit models in SW. Every user I know who is experienced in both tools is of the same opinion (at least a half dozen).


While the sheet metal package in Pro/E may be more sophisticated with complex surfaces, most users don't create complex surfaces in sheet metal (I have never created one). SW is also much more widely used in my corner of the world - and a lot of other parts of the world too.


The Intent Manager in Pro/E creates almost as many problems as it solves: it's just barely worth leaving it on (many users turn it off). I have far more problems with unrequested/undesirable/undisplayed alignments in Pro/E than I ever do in SW -and then there isthe Intent Manager's habit of refusing to apply alignments, esp. when they conflict with the 'weak' alignments it has chosen to apply.


Assemblies are much easier in SW: simply drag and drop from one window into the assembly, or simply control-drag the new component off of a model tree (in any of the tiled windows). Oh yeah: you can do this with features in parts too. Pro/E can't do this - and probably never will, since it's not a Windows-based product.


Anybody done any 'light reading' lately on the hidden config.pro options? Books have been written on this subject: some are hundreds of pages.You won't find any in SW: it doesn't need them.


Butmeaningful comparisons are best left tounbiased experts, who do these kinds of comparisons for a living. Let's face it: canned demos performed byself-serving expert users to a captive audience can be misleading (we have all seen how the PTC sales staff has mastered this technique). I'm sure design-engine will come up with a canned demo for the Badgerland conference that will make PTC Sales proud: after all, he is a purveyor of PTC products and his livelihood is dependent on Pro/Engineer sales.


I'd like to see what folks such as the Aberdeen Group have compiled on comparisons of productivity between Pro/E and SW - and some other CAD products, such as Inventor. I'd like to see somebody post something from them on this message board.

 

[dgs]

... I'm sure design-engine will come up with a canned demo for the Badgerland conference that will make PTC Sales proud: after all, he is a purveyor of PTC products and his livelihood is dependent on Pro/Engineer sales. ...

I was thinking of how I could respond point by point to your post, but it's not worth it. So much misinformation and you have shown over and over that you're not interetsed in discussing these things, only spouting off your opinion. but the above I couldn't let go.

Have you read Bart's report on the initial SW vs. Pro/E 'show down' at his office? Far from a PTC love fest, it actually praises SW for how far it has come and how close it is to Pro/E now.

Perhaps you should read the man's writings before you call him out.