Infinite Frustration

[michael3130]

dgs,


I had the same experience as you. I came from an SDRC and SW background and was then thrown into ProE Wildfire 4 years ago. There were 3 other light users in the office but none of them had much CAD experience so I was pretty much on my own. There were no books but using basic knowledge of how 3D CAD packages worked I worked my way round it and same as you, by the time training day arrived 2 months later I knew most of what the basic course was teaching me. I'll admit for the first 3 days I could do very little and I did wonder if I'd made a mistake changing to ProE but 4 years on, I use both packages happily and on a daily basis.


I'm not a one off case either. Another engineer started here just over a year ago with a background in SW and Solidedge and he picked ProE up easily enough.


Going back to training, we had formal sheetmetal training earlier this year and I was not impressed. I managed to pick up most of it myself but thought there must be more to it so we went for the course. Unfortunately I was right and gained very little from the training.


Michael

 

[HARMAN]

Erich, i feel for you. I have been using pro-e for 8 months now after using inventor for years (pretty much since it was born) and thetransition seems very similar for users tranferring from sw.


Firstly i'd agree with some of the other comments that you really need traing to pick up this software effectively, some books can be very good but it's not generally the same as someone showing you. You must sort this out!


Secondly, you will always be confronted with hurdles due to the fact that pro-e is what it is. Lets be honest if, pro-e wasintuitive oreasy to use this forum wouldn't have so many posts.


The company i work for has 30 or so engineers, many of them have used pro-e for years and are strong users of it but most can also use other software (generally SW, SEorInv) which they prefer over pro-e due to the fact that they find it more productive, but they still use pro-e because the company dictates it.


It will get easier, trust me.


Oh yeah, and when you've got your head around the modelling you then have the awfull drawing part to deal with.

 

[Erich with an H]

Seems to me anything PTC is involved with is garbage...


I've been trying to join the PTCuser.org group, I can't get a login! I've tried my work email, and a personal one. Their support suggests it maybe in a spam box...no such luck.


My resume is out, but I'm afraid it doesn't look good to be job hunting so quickly after starting a new career. I just don't want to deal with Pro/E anymore.

 

[AHA-D]

It will get easier, trust me.

I wouldn't bet too much on that

My history is Autocad - you have to start with something - basically as an introduction to the electronic drawing board. Thanks to Autocad (version ? on 5.25" floppies) I was able to get CAD introduced in my first company. They (and I) went for EMS by Intergraph. When EMS went parametric in the mid 90-ies I jumped on that wagon as I am basically a lazy person being tired of moving, re-fillettingand re-trimming entities. Intergraph introduced Solid Edge, we got free training and "play-with-it" versions. In that time Microstation was also part of Intergraph so we could play with that also. When EMS was set to a stop we had to choose to exchange for SE for free or pay more to get UGS. SE wasn't good enough at that time, most in the assembly part, and most of the drawings used and produced in the company were 2D so it was hard to get everyone on any high-end CAD, so the company went for Microstation instead. Being a bit tired with the company in general I went freelance and got (chose)Solid Edge from (for) my first big customer. Price, ease of use and completeness (modeling, drawing, assembly and sheetmetal in one) were keyfactors. When private business went bad I got back on the market and was thrown on ProE. Man, that was suffering ! I thought I knew how to model on a computer but had to learn everything again. It took me 3 months to get on a decent level and 6 months to get modeling above the general level in my group. Detailing is still a PITA.


I agree with all you struggling non-ProE users here : it's hard to learn the strange ways of ProE.


But to get back to the original line. Having done programming and having some insight in how computers and programmers deal with the world I think there are basic problems in the "object model" that ProE uses and how it works internally that prevent it from doing what other CAD has no problems with. Basic issues are : not native windows, no clear distinction between drawing and model, working with models in memory rather than the filed model, unability to work with underconstrained things (it looks underconstrained but weak dimensions are part of the set), ...

 

[kthomas]

The ongoing saga......what is better. users must understand that comparisons here are like apples and oranges. Pro-e is a suite of software which has fea and machine code genereation capabilities (to name a few) built in. SW does not. Pro-e is a Very powerful solid modeler. Yes it operates differently. it requires more input sometimes. These extra "things" you have to do are what gives the software the power it has. side by side comparisons are like comparing cars to dragsters. Yes it has a long learning curve. Sorry, if it is easy, it probably isn't worth as much.

 

[dougr]

Anyone ever use UG or CATIA - think Pro/E's hard to use ???

 

[AHA-D]

The ongoing saga......what is better. users must understand that comparisons here are like apples and oranges. Pro-e is a suite of software which has fea and machine code genereation capabilities (to name a few) built in. SW does not.

Don't see how this would be relevant. There's lot of CAD and as good as all of them can be used to drive manufacturing and FEA. Whether this is part of the core of the program,as an addon or external program only affects updating and bidirectionality. It is not a measurement of quality.

Pro-e is a Very powerful solid modeler. Yes it operates differently. it requires more input sometimes. These extra "things" you have to do are what gives the software the power it has.

The power of software is in the features it has and the stability with which these features can be applied and modified. For all features that ProE has there are features it lacks when compared to others.

Side by side comparisons are like comparing cars to dragsters.

Not that bad as a comparison. OK, a car is slower than a dragster, but it takes a shorter turn. Try driving a dragster through town.

Yes it has a long learning curve. Sorry, if it is easy, it probably isn't worth as much.

It is a common belief that harder-to-handle programs are better or more powerfull. My programming background tells me that when any idiot can work with your program you have to put about 5 times more energy in it to get it to that level.

 

[dgs]

Sorry, if it is easy, it probably isn't worth as much.

To quote Colonel Potter from MASH, "Horsehockey!"

I simply don't buy the argument that if it's powerful, you have to accept hard to use. It's a cop out. There's no reason why 'easy to use' or 'intuitive' shouldn't be part of the development goals of Pro|E. Solidworks has proiven that ease of use and power in 3D CAD can go together. Sure, it's not as poewrful as Pro|E in some areas, but it's getting there and remains intuitive as it gains capabilities.


Easy combined with powerful is much, much more valuable that either by itself.

 

[prohammy]

Sorry, if it is easy, it probably isn't worth as much.

To quote Colonel Potter from MASH, "Horsehockey!"

dgs,


Marvelous quote, very rare for someone to think of Colonel Potter on a ProE/SW Forum.


(Now before I go any further the rest of this is in jest, please don't attack me, my fragile ProE ego can't take it)


Maybe we should ask the admin guys to rename this Rant & Rave forum. How about Solidworks User Group

. Just a thought......


Or maybe someone could set up a whole new website www.proebasshers'r'us.com.org.net.ac.uc.ie.co.uk.


But seriously folks. When it comes right down to it both ProE and SW are just tools of the trade. Ask any carpenter what saw is the best and they all have their favourites as well. Likewise for us engineers, the divide these days is across the PTC/SW/Auotdesk/UGS/CATIA lines. Simply put they are ways for us to earn our crust.


SW is easy to use because that was/is part of the philosophy that the guys who started it concentrated on (commonly called market targeting). PTC's philosophy is somewhat more dubious, world domination seems to be the core, and to that end the goal seems to be be target the multi-nationals and provide them with the complex pan-departmental solution. While doing this, small little engineers and their grips are peanuts to them (this has long been a worry to ProE users, I remeber in the 90's worrying that Rand would become the 'owner' and 'developer' of ProE, while PTC would be the PLM guru).


Summing up (ie trying to condense). They all have their merits, but all are cr*p in their own special way


Kev


PS

 

[dougr]

Pro/E's just a wee bit more complicated and expensive than a carpenter's saw.....

 

[prohammy]

Pro/E's just a wee bit more complicated and expensive than a carpenter's saw.....

Yeeesss dougr.......sorry for over-simplifying......but my point is that it is a tool, and even for simple tools people tend to have a preference


Kev

 

[kthomas]

well i guess i started a fire storm. my point is ........that it is what it is. Yes it is different from solid works. it has its advantages and disadvantages. They ALL do. Prohammy said they are all crap in there own special way. i agree. i have worked with autocad, inventor, and many versions of pro-e, along with a lot of other softwares. i could make lists of things to "change" in all of them. My point is comparisons are somewhat pointless. they are what they are. the reasons we have this forum is to exchange ideas and knowledge about the intricacies of PRO-E software. not to complain about how its easier to do tasks in something else. Those arguments are for salespeople. we are users.


that's enough of my "horsehockey" for today, i'm done. i have work to do. by the way, i always respected sherman potter.

 

[dgs]

Nice to see there are other old timers that remember MASH.

BTW - My Horsehocky comment wasn't meant in criticism of anyone in particular. i just get annoyed that folks seem to equate power with complexity and therefore accept bad UI design as something that is inevitable.I don't think it has to be that way. I wish more folks, especially folks at PTC, felt that way.

 

[prohammy]

Nice to see there are other old timers that remember MASH.

(I'm looking for a smilie that shows indignation)


I mean, I watched re-runs on Paramount. I mean how old do you think I am. Never have I been so insulted........


Now back to reality. CracKing show, loved it the first time round and the last.

Kev

 

[vlad1979]

Nice to see there are other old timers that remember MASH.

(I'm looking for a smilie that shows indignation)


I mean, I watched re-runs on Paramount. I mean how old do you think I am. Never have I been so insulted........


Kev

83 years old, you need a nurse to take care of you


View attachment 4225


didn't remembered the first time, but I think Margaret HOTLIPS

Edited by: vlad1979

 

[michaelpaul]

Side by side comparisons are like comparing cars to dragsters.

Not that bad as a comparison. OK, a car is slower than a dragster, but it takes a shorter turn. Try driving a dragster through town.

You don't need a dragster to go get your groceries. If you need the performance and "benefits" for 1% of your needs, is the "performance gain" a help or a hindrance?

Michael

 

[michaelpaul]

Pro/E's just a wee bit more complicated and expensive than a carpenter's saw.....

Yeah, but the carpenter can go to the store and buy his saw and be ready to use it.

If he had to purchase his saw like ProE sells their software, he'd buy the basic saw but then find out while at the jobsite that he needs to buy a blade because the saw didn't come with one. Then he'd find out that the carrying case is also extra. And don't forget about the tool needed to change the blade. Then he'd have to go to training for a week to learn how to use the saw and all the accessories because the owner's manual, while thick and heavy, doesn't really explain anything. Finally, he'd be ready to actually use his saw only to find out that his co-worker has been done with the job for a week because he used a hand saw!

Michael

 

[mjcole_ptc]

At least if you ask Pro/E for pricing of different options they'll give them to you. They also offer special savings from time to time like Free ISDX or Advanced Assembly or 40% off certain options.

PTC's license management is a nightmare for pretty much anyone but it has gotten much easier than the earlier versions.

Regarding the saw Pro/E is a lot like a hand saw and the best way to learn it is by asking people who have already used one for years for tips to help you know how to use one properly and efficiently. If you run into a problem in Sketcher believe me you're not the first person to run into it so you have three options.

1. Give up.
2. Develop your own solution.
3. Ask someone with more experience for help.

Or you can Pay someone else or PTC thousands of dollars for advice you can get for free elsewhere.

I'm surprised PTC has such high prices for maintenance fees when they offer such piss-poor service and reduce their workforce. I would never pay for maintenance because I can provide my own for free. At least there are no termination fees so you won't get punished if you go elsewhere for your CAD package.

Michael

 

[dgs]

If the saw was like Pro|E, it would be a powerful tool, able to perform many cuts that lesser tools couldn't. The new user would be thrilled with his purchase, and would tote it off to his job site.


Arriving there, he'd find it hard to open. There would be 'latches' on the case, but no obvious means of opening it. While his colleague got his lesser saw out and started to set up for work, the Pro|E saw user would push and prod at the case latches until he hit one corner just right and it popped open. Aha! I'll have to remember that.


Now he's ready. (Coworker has already made a few simple cuts.) Where's the power cord? Maybe loose in the case? Nope. Ah, here's a door on the saw with a symbol on it. I bet that's it, I'll just push the symbol to get it open. Doesn't work. How does it open? Again, after more pushing and prodding, he'd discover that you actually have to push on the empty part of the bod next to the symbol. Pulls the cord out ,plugs it in.


Here we go! (Coworker has a couple of walls built). He lays his new Pro|E saw on the board, grasps the handle and pulls the trigger. Nothing. Tries again. Still nothing. Checks the plug, it's fine. Hmm. Pulls the trigger and happens to notice that a small panel flipped out on the far side of the saw,away from the handle, nearly out of sight. Inside the panel is a wired remote with all the control settings for the saw. The main switch is set to 'ready' instead of 'execute'.Ah, I bet 'ready' means 'off'.


There are a lot of setting here, in a multi page touch screen interface. Terms he's not familiar with, so he gets the manual out (coworker has a couple of rooms built). The manual is a big book, with a very small index. He sits down to sort through it. A whistle blows - lunch time.


He reads through the manual at lunch and pretty much sorts out how to start cutting (Coworker has had to go buy more lumber, he ran out already). He sets the controls and makes his first cut. Oops, misunderstood the 'trim slant' setting was and cut the wrong angle. Re-check the manual, re-set the sawand he's ready to go. Now he's making beautiful cuts.


Coworker has returned and is in trouble. He's got the house nearly done, but he's having trouble with the complicated cuts for the roof. He asks the Pro|E saw guy if his saw will do the fancy work better than the simple saw he has.


"Sure, no problem. That's why I bought this saw, because it does this complicated stuff. Let's check the manual ...."

 

[dougr]

You guys should try living in UG space:


rounds are blends


drawing formats are patterns


try dimensioning angles in sketcher


features can be "unparameterized"