Solid Works vs Creo

[mgnt8]

It's not manual dexterity that you need to work on, it's exercising your synaptic plasticity

Procedural memory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[michaelpaul]

Your loss of constraints and so forth upon closing is because you are not saving all objects with the drawing, there's a config setting for this.
Model tree is configurable.

personally, I think this is one of the biggest faults. it relies on the user to know that there is a config setting in order to get access a desired feature. it's a chicken/egg scenario. you can you know there's a setting if you don't know there's a setting to look for or even what it may be called? too often, people have a problem with something and the solution is to try one of a variety of different config settings to rectify the situation. that's a bit like requiring a user of a computer to access the BIOS just to get something to work right.

even in the new version of CREO where they put many of the different setup screens in one tabbed location, saving the files is quirky. depending on which tab you're on, saving means different things. sometimes it means saving your config file. other times it means saving your sys.col file. sometimes you need to export and not save. it's not smooth at all and even this still doesn't eliminate the fact that you still need to know what every possible config.pro option is or that it even exists before you can activate that option.

yes, the complaints are due to not knowing the software. but the fact that you have to know that much about the software and understand how it works way behind the scenes is ridiculous. the fact that you need to know there's a config.pro, a sys.col, a drawing detail configuration file, a menu configuration file, etc. and accessing them all and saving them all are done in different manners is just plain stupid. No other software i've ever used requires the user to go to so many different places to perform system setup and customization nor does it require accessing multiple system files. well, at least not since using DOS on a regular basis anyway. modern software (and let's face it, we all know that Pro-E/CREO is not modern but is a band aid over a patch over a fix for software that was written 25 years ago) has a single setup tab in the options and EVERYTHING that can be changed in the software is present in that tab and the settings are saved.

Heck, in Pro-E when you go into an exploded view you have to make sure you right click on the explode view that is highlighted with a "+" symbol and click save or else your modifications aren't saved when you hit SAVE to save the part file. really? why should I make a change to my model and save my model but that change isn't really saved unless I first tell the software yes I do really want to save the modification I made and then go to save the file in two separate steps? STUPID

Pro-E/CREO is NOT easy to use. Yes, it requires knowledge but it's not intuitive. those that claim you just need to become more familiar with it to understand it are speaking the truth but the underlying fact is that it is not a user friendly piece of software and anybody will be able to learn how to use something bad when they spend more time with it but that doesn't mean that the underlying fact is that the software is poo so knowing more about it just helps you manage the poo more efficiently.

 

[michael3130]

Michaelpaul has pretty much summed up my feelings too.

 

[dgs]

MichaelPaul, I've been saying similar things for the 17 years I've been using Proe / Creo. There's no reason that a powerful tool can't be intuitive to use.

On the saving, the config option 'save_objects' defaults to 'changed_and_specified' which, in the case of a drawing, will save the drawing and any changed objects used in the drawing.

 

[wogz]

OK then, Is there a way to make the model tree (assembly mode) a little easier to use? (is there a config to change?)As mentioned in another post, once parts are in a group or a pattern, you cannot just select the group or pattern to manipulate. You mush open the group or pattern, and select each & every component.

Right now, if I want to hide component, I need to open up the group or pattern and select each, same with simple reps, and a few other tasks.. And, when selecting all the components in said group, I do run the chance of accidentally moving these components to another group, removing them, or just lousing up the order..

Which leads to another frustration: No Undo button!! Well, there is but it only goes back a certain amount.. (I'm really quite amazed that the undo button / crtl Z seems to be a later addition, and one that seems to be a bit of a novelty..)

 

[dgs]

There are options under the "settings" button, "Tree Filters", but nothing that'll change the basic behavior that you describe.

There is a config setting to set the undo limit:

general_undo_stack_limit [integer]

The default is 50, but certain actions reset the undo stack like activating a window. Proe didn't have any undo until early in the WF series and it was quite limited then.

 

[dr_gallup]

Another good use for layers.

 

[wogz]

OK, here’s a bitch, a bit of stupidity (at least in my mind..) or a bug, or a…

I’ve made a hole, a simple hole. I’ve made another hole. The 2nd hole is constrained to a work plane thru the 1st hole (axis), so that the holes remain constant to each other (and so I just need to move one hole, not each hole independently.)

Hmmm, we can make them a tapped hole? (instead of a PEM) OK, so I change the holes form a simple hole to a ‘complex’ hole, a tapped hole.

Ahh, the 2nd hole has lost it’s reference plane. Why? Well, it seems when I changed the hole feature from a simple to complex, the original axis used to constrain the work plane is now a new axis, and Pro E can’t figure out where the original axis went. So, I need to go and re-constrain the work plane to the new axis, which is essentially the same hole…

Now, I have to repeat this about 20 times… And it’s now a finite hole, not a thru hole as it was.. So I need to click on the ‘thru’ button for each hole…

 

[fenil]

I agree with Wogz. I'm currently using both Creo 2 and SW on a daily basis and an equal number of hours per day so I feel I can be justified in giving an opinion and comparing the 2 packages. I continually hear people say what you have said about SW being a middle of the road software package but from what I have seen, everything I can do in Creo I can do in SW and usually with less issues, fewer mouse clicks and quicker. It's stable if done correctly in SW and the 2D drafting in SW is streets ahead. I'd love to see some hard facts on what Creo can do that SW can't.

It all depends on the complexity of the model/assembly. Every software has a pros and cons.

How many type of coordinate system can Solid works work with while modeling? Just Cartesian coordinate system??

 

[mploof]

I've recently switched over to Solidworks after about nine years of the Pro/E family of software (I sure miss that feature in Wildfire 1 where it would spontaneously close and lose all my work without even asking. Why did they ever get rid of that?). Solidworks seems to be fine for my needs so far, though my one beef is how slow it is to use compared to Creo. I had about 80 two-key macros in Creo that covered about 95% of the functions I ever needed, and I could build up models lighting quick by dispensing with most of the button-clicking.

Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place in Solidworks, but is there any sort of similar keyboard macro mapping? I've found the macro options in the Tools drop-down menu, but those seem to be heavier-duty visual basic macros that can't just be called through keyboard shortcuts.

 

[design-engine]

Has anyone aptly tried to define 'Hi End Software'

I define 'Hi-End CAD tools' as

1 Software Sold Modular. ie. if Tesla needs added functionality that they didn't originally know they needed they can purchase that module or application. Solidworks CNC shop must take an IGES file from their customer to get CNC done. It can take 20+ hrs to write tool paths for the part. When the customer makes a change the next day the 20+ hrs must be redone due to the new IGES file. In Creo the OLD tool path simply updates like a part in assembly mode. Creo Catia and NX have an application for Advanced Assembly / Manufacture etc for example while the mid range modelers do not. ie. Solidworks, Inventor etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7X-F4nyIFg < one video that explains CNC tool path updates

2. Handles memory differently. Pro/ENGINEER & Creo handle resident memory. Soldiworks Inventor are like Microsft word. If the file is out of memory you lost the part.

 

[michaelpaul]

In Creo the OLD tool path simply updates like a part in assembly mode. Creo Catia and NX have an application for Advanced Assembly / Manufacture etc for example while the mid range modelers do not. ie. Solidworks, Inventor etc...

while I totally understand the point you are making with this, the reality is that many development firms sub out the machining of their tools to any number of suppliers and not all of those suppliers use PTC products or are integrated into the designing firm's CAD database so the updates may not necessarily be seamless even if each firm is using CREO. While the design process as envisioned by PTC is great for a fully integrated and large company, lots of smaller companies can't integrate in the same manner.

 

[design-engine]

Im doing a series of 90 min presentations comparing both for various ID departments. I wonder if I should make those videos available after?

 

[acad]

Im doing a series of 90 min presentations comparing both for various ID departments. I wonder if I should make those videos available after?

Hello Bart,
I think you should make those videos available.
I am pretty sure that this will surprise many ID managers.

 

[adi_31]

Solidworks is definitely much better than creo.As for industry use, Solidworks is becoming more widely used than creo because creo is too expensive and is more cumbersome when it comes to doing simple modeling. Solidworks also has better FEA and dynamic simulation capabilities than creo does.

 

[design-engine]

I spent the past three months updating the Creo version of Design-engine's Advanced assembly class and in so doing Im updating what we offer for the Solidworks assembly class concurrent. Can I tell you guys first Im impressed w/ the advancement Solidworks has made. Top down design is still a bit lacking and im preparing a speed test to be sure of both top down & assemblies over 2500 components. Solidworks has done quite a a bit to handle larger assemblies and are even given a different definition of large assemblies. ie. sw has many of the same tools as we have in Creo.