Pro E vs. SolidWorks

[NYYJASON]

In part of response to michael3130

I am an engineer, I am a sales guy for Boston Engineering. I sell everything from services to software and we use all CAD systems like Auto CAD, Solid works, Pro-E. Everyone here is a huge fan of Pro-E over the others.

I have been told that in the long term Pro-E is better because it can handle a lot more than SW. There is a longer learning curve but he new Pro-E aka Wildfire. Wildfire 4.0 looks to have a way better handle on the ease of use that SW has. There are less points and clicks and the UI is very similar to that of SW.

Has anyone here used SW 2008? I'm basing my info off of the 2007.

 

[EIDO!]

to save much time on this never ending story, I can sum things up by saying if you are looking for an easy to use software that does your CAD requirements as long as that its not complicated shapes and designs, and you are cash sensitive you go with SW. If you are looking for a more advance software that can be upgraded through add ons and extensions to do more than just CAD, you go with Pro/E.

Pro/E is a high end solution while SW is a medium range one. you cannot compare them ... the capabilities of Pro/E way surpasses SW.

 

[Mindripper]

The only area I'm aware of that Pro/E still has something on SW is in the complex surfacing area. There is certain functionality in specific areas where Pro/E is better, but these are completely outnumbered by the huge variety of superior functionality in SW.


Much of the functionality of the PTC 'modules' such as CAM are add-ons (not fully integrated packages). SW offers similar functionality through 'Gold Partners', and makes no pretense about these being SW products. But SW does have a fully integrated CAD file managment system that is easy to use: this is a core functionality that Pro/E desperately lacks.

 

[dgs]

Mindripper - You keep making these blanket statements about SW and I frankly don't get it. I'm in the middle of a development program now with SW 2006, simple geometry where SW supposedly shines,and I can't see the big deal. I find many more things that I miss from Pro|E than things I wish Pro|E had. I'll grant you that that's mostly due to the fact that I'm used to Pro|E and want SW to work the same way. It doesn't, but most of the time it's just different, not better.
<UL>
<LI>I really miss datums on the fly, I can't see that's possible in SW.</LI>
<LI>I miss the ability to change a cut to a protrusion to a surface</LI>
<LI>I miss being able to create a diameter dimension on a sketched arc.</LI>
<LI>I miss being able to save a part in insert mode (roll back in SW)</LI>
<LI>I miss having insert mode in assemblies.</LI>
<LI>I miss being able to use and assembly while a part in memory is in insert mode.</LI>
<LI>I miss Pro|E's reroute feature.</LI>
<LI>I miss Pro|E's draggable dialog boxes that allow you to see more.</LI>[/list]


On the other hand ...
<UL>
<LI>I like the dirt simple sectioning of parts.</LI>
<LI>I love the measure tool - mostly.</LI>
<LI>I like rolling overa constraint and seeing the effected entities highlight.</LI>
<LI>I like the built in perspective mode.</LI>
<LI>I like the graphic feedback when working on a part in assembly mode (rest of the assy turns grey)</LI>
<LI>I like the visual preview of the corner trim in sketcher.</LI>
<LI>I like the 'leave it for now' failure mode.</LI>
<LI>I like that the unit displayin dimension dialogs and that it doesn't effect the ability to enter equations to calculate values</LI>[/list]


Lots I miss, lots I like but no slam dunk. Frankly, I found a lot more stupid little interface things just lie Pro|E, which surprised me. Like if you try to select a part that's section on the section plane, you can't you have to select an actual geometry surface. Like part edges are displayed in black, but so are constrained section lines and dimensions making a section that's inside the model really hard to see.


On file management, I find the SW system maddening. I've asked 3 knowledgeable SW folks here about how it works and none of them completely understand it. IN Pro|E the rules for where it looks for assy components is 3 or 4 steps. In SW, it's at least 8 or 9 and a couple of them are recursive directory searches based on where it was last found or where the assy was or something. Made my brain hurt looking at it.


In Pro|E if I want to make a copy of an entire directory, I just go into Windows and copy the directory. Done (as long as I'm not suing Intralink) That doesn't seem to work in SW because SW 'remembers' where it last found that part and goes to look there.


In the end I find them both capable programs with their own quirks and benefits.

 

[kevinjbrault]

I agree with "dgs" on all counts except:

1. 
   <LI>I believe Wildfire 2 does make the assembly grey when you activate a part.</LI>

To add to the "I miss in SW" list:

1. 
   <LI>I missed being able to make a positional sketch dimension zero or negative.</LI>
   <LI>I missed having a linear pattern follow the geometry that the sketch reference (picture a cone with ribs patterned down it. In SW all the ribs will always be the same OD).</LI>
   <LI>I missed being able tostart an FEA and be able to go back to modeling while it ran.</LI>
   <LI>I missed being able to create a plane tangent to a surface (Cylinder, sphere, etc.)</LI>
   <LI>I missed having automatic balloons in drawings (this has been improved in 2007 but is not nearly as powerful as ProE's).</LI>
   <LI>I missed being able to sort a model generated BOM (I think this is fixed in a SW2007 service pack).</LI>
   <LI>I missed being able to install various versions of ProE and Intralink by pushing a folder out to the workstations.</LI>

We went from ProE 2001 to SW 2005 and back to ProE WF2. There were things I missed from SW when we moved into WF2 but I do not recall them now.

 

[dgs]

WF2 or WF3 does not highlight the part like SW does. Edit a part in the assy context in SW and the part turns bright blue and the rest of the assy turns dull grey. Very clear and very nice.


Good point on the negative dims, I miss that too.

 

[Ed Brabant]

I wish that someone would take the best of Solidworks and Pro Engineer and combine them to make one kick a$$ package. There are good points and bad points to them both. Do a search on monster for Pro E and Solid Works and see who has more jobs. Pro needs to move more to the window based interface. They have made great progress but they do need to go a lot further. I have tried to learn the two of them with some sucess. i am lucky we have the two packages here.

 

[gamauf]

I don't have a dog in this fight, however:

Is anyone actually comparing current version to current version?

Such as Wildfire 3 to SW 7 (or actually 8 which is out now).
It sounds a little like arguing favorite ice cream flavors. LOL.
Or arguing the elegance of a Mac interface vs winDoze. (Which seems to
have a lot to do with comfort level & people too scared to try something
new, as at least as much as ease of use or feature sets).

Approaching it from user perspective, or CAD admin?

As for combining 2 applications --- well, isn't that what has been tried
with SDRC I-deas & Unigraphics, for about 5 years now, to spotty & varied
uh, success?

I understood that SolidWorks was developed by former Pro-E developers.

As for "making a positional sketch dim negative" - isn't there a "change
direction" button in SW that doesn't give the confusion earlier versions of
Pro used to experience?

Too new to SW & I have some bits of Pro burned into my brain...
Edited by: gamauf

 

[shuga_raye]

In Pro|E if I want to make a copy of an entire directory, I just go into Windows and copy the directory. Done (as long as I'm not suing Intralink) That doesn't seem to work in SW because SW 'remembers' where it last found that part and goes to look there.


In the end I find them both capable programs with their own quirks and benefits.

This is funny (the whole posting)! I usually agree with you dgs but it is maddening for me to rename a part andPro/Eloses it! I SO HATE REDEFINING MATES!
Edited by: shuga_raye

 

[Mindripper]

Now that I'm running Pro/E, this is some of the functionality I miss from SW: this is stuff many users do every day -


Being able to add or delete a feature in a group that is patterned. In Pro/E, you have to delete the pattern, do the feature in question, then re-create the pattern.


A truly functional hole generation utility: Hole Wizard is vastly superior to Pro/E's lame imitation


Being able to add draft within a feature. I'm dealing with a model of a molded part with a bunch of lettering on it right now. What takes seconds in SW will take days in Pro/E.


Great graphics. Being able to see all the edges of my model when viewing normal to a surface, esp. in sketch mode. How come Pro/E cannot give us black edges on our parts?


Drawings in a fraction of the time. I hate making drawings, but SW makes it easy: it's much more tedious in Pro/E, where so much of drawing creationis tied directly to the model.

 

[Mindripper]

Addendum: I almost forgot instances (configurations in SW). It's so easy to make simple variations in SW, and the configs are stored within the part, not a separate file. You don't have to (re)verify every configuration before you can save the part. And you can get fancy too, via a genuine Excel spreadsheet.

 

[dgs]

I guess I work differently that you do. I rarely use the hole tool, but I useinsert mode and reroute all the time.


We are going to have to disagree on the graphics. I've come to call SW "cartoon CAD" because of it's funny papers like colors and outlines. The black edges get in the way in sketcher for me big time. I can't tell a model edge from a constrained sketch entity. I just spent a half an hour trying to figure out why I couldn't create a cut from this sketch. Came to discover the sketch was open and the open part of the section was obscured by a part edge. (BTW - SW only said, like Pro|E, some obscure error about not being able to intersect the part. Nothing about an open section.) Oh, and I've got all the display options (I think) cranked up and the cylinders are still faceted. Pro|E graphics are far superior in my view, more like real parts rather than illustrations.


I went into this project anticipating great things based on what I've heard folks say about SW. I've discovered a tool just as flawed as Pro|E but in different ways.

 

[gamauf]

Now that I'm running Pro/E, this is some of the
functionality I miss from SW: this is stuff many users do every day -


Being able to add or delete a feature in a group that is patterned. In
Pro/E,
you have to delete the pattern, do the feature in question, then re-create
the pattern.

Are you SURE about that? What version are you running?
I haven't run Pro in a bit, but I think you may be mistaken about
patterning in Wildfire 2+. Or else more information is required as to what
exactly you are referring to, because I can't tell from what you said.

You sound pretty unhappy to be using Pro vs SW, though.

The biggest thing that SW has going, is that there several frequently used
functions are rolled to the top of the "function list" and it uses a few less
clicks, but I am beginning to think they are just later in the creation
process, once some other choices open - and isn't significantly more
economical. It just seems so because they (using Pro) are on the front end
of a creation sequence, so the feedback loop feels different.

It does have a few things on Pro. I don't quite see it as a Pro-killer at this
time. Certainly not for its feature set yet.

dgs is closer to the mark - there are problems, they just happen to be
DIFFERENT problems. This really DOES sound like a Pepsi-Coke squabble.
Edited by: gamauf

 

[dgs]

his really DOES sound like a Pepsi-Coke squabble.

Or Ford vs. Chevy, Mac vs. PC, etc. Each side has their points and may even be able to point to certain ways or instances or points in time where their side was clearly superior. But both sides are decent choices, with their own strengths and weaknesses.


I think it'll be interesting for me to go back to Pro|E when my SW project is done and see what I miss from SW.

 

[gamauf]

Re: Ripping into what one isn't happy with...

Maybe there is an attitude goes with the territory!?

I don't think its being negative
to be a little garrulous about what doesn't always work as well as you'd like - and expressing the irritation.

Not everyone understands the form.
Not always the most fun people at cocktail parties.

At least thru version 7 - SolidWorks is no Pro-killer by any stretch. GD&T through version 7 does not save into the model, supposedly version 8 addresses that.

SW does make some nice in-roads.

Pro-E has a lot of things that got klunky when another area got better. Competition hopefully makes them both a better tool & the people working with them benefit in either case.

That above-mentioned difficult attitude is probably what causes people to strive for change in the engineering field: their pet peeves.

Which they keep scratching until it works like they want, or it stops itching!

(Sheesh! That's it! Compulsive-Obsessives!).

So it tends to keep most engineering-type people from being outstanding salesmen. They don't care how good whatcha got IS --- they want better. Somebody else has to tell them when to wind down.

Just like engineers & designers or whomever in the field rarely know to draw the line - there's always one more gadget or design change they want to get in.

They are focused at what needs fixin' - even if it works pretty good already - it can always use another carburetor or something!!!

Just my opinion.

Edited by: gamauf

 

[cncwhiz]

I started using solid works "2000" over the holiday. I am a pro user from version 17. I see some cool things the pro could use, but also things that SW could use. I like the "drag and drop" in SW. I like the "hex" funtion in SW, this is a pia in pro. I don't like assembly in SW at all. I havetried "smart mate" as well as the other twenty icon's. Proseems to be much better for assembly. I just started playing with SW a few days ago without help, so I will see more as I go. I could use a little help in undersrtanding the assembly format.

 

[wsylvester]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=solidworks&s earch=Search[/url]

 

[shuga_raye]

I started using solid works "2000" over the holiday. I am a pro user from version 17. I see some cool things the pro could use, but also things that SW could use. I like the "drag and drop" in SW. I like the "hex" funtion in SW, this is a pia in pro. I don't like assembly in SW at all. I havetried "smart mate" as well as the other twenty icon's. Proseems to be much better for assembly. I just started playing with SW a few days ago without help, so I will see more as I go. I could use a little help in undersrtanding the assembly format.

Without starting a war, you do understand that there has been drastic improvements since 2000. As far as mates, I think Pro is really limited in mating, the advanced mates offer the ability to have a component move in it's natural motion, they offer symmetry, etc. Actually, they are not added until 2004.

 

[cncwhiz]

I can mate with no issues in pro e, but I have been using it for a long time. What I could not understand is when I used "mate" it would assemble the part upside down? I used the "tab" to flip the part but it would not work. I do not have a newer version of solid works so I am teaching myself soild works with what I have.

 

[Mindripper]

It's important to draw comparisons between the current releases of these products, as both continue to evolve. There have been HUGE improvements in SW since the 2000 release: the latest is 2008, released just a few weeks ago. However, their new releases tend to be 'buggy', so the 2007 release is a better comparison at this point. Pro/E is at WF3, but WF4(due next quarter) also promises to have significant improvements.


Don't get me wrong: Pro/E definitely has some advantages in both basic and advanced functionality. I love the Line of Death: it's the simplest and easiset-to-useline trim function I've ever seen. Some of the dimensioning functionality in drawings is definitely better than SW. And I concur that assembly mates are actually better in Pro/E, once you get used to it. But the overall ease of learning, use and default setups are definitely much better with SW, and the fact that it's a native Windows application (with MS Word and Excel built right in) makes it a much more robust package for most users. Many experienced Pro/E users seem oblivious to these advantages, since they have been running Pro/E for years and have adapted to life as a CAD user without being exposed to these possibilities. Andsome experienced users of Pro/E may be focused on complex surfacing, where SW lags Pro/E.


I hope both CAD packages continue to develop into better products - and they adapt some of the better features from their competitors in this process. In any case, I'm learning to live with both of them, regardless of my preferences. I just hope that nobody out there is so ignorant as to suggest that one CAD package is the best for everyone in every application,or always will be.