Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.
don`t belive big companies are welcome to update the software to new funcionalities every 6 months. It is nice for small buisness, a horror for big ones.
Second, matured users seems to be not keen to follow newest upgrades also because it invokes temporary drop of efficiency.
What am I interested the most in nowadays is the official statement of PTC executivies to stay aside regarding hyped "cloud" topic. For this moment it seams reasonable to be careful while considering real benefit of working on cloud. Remote conections with the software makes me a little bit scared about relyability.
From other side it happened before, specialy for small buisness that relyability of software does not care that much. SW had made its start on PC "unstable" windows based, and turned it into success. Costs, costs, costs....
If this is a major driven factor working on cloud open new door in this topic. Developers are aware of this. I bet, at the end user will not pay less, but...
Cloud theoreticaly make one scenario possible - sharing smart the funcionality with wise strategy of costs. Imagine buying 100 seats of software then making it accessable for thousand of people by paying not for the time of session but the time of invoking the appropriate software funcionality and servers power. That makes a differerance, big one...
"The next thing, the Any Bottom assembly is a more
sophisticated concept that requires changes to Pro/E, Creo, and to
Windchill, as well as change the way the two together do assembly
models."
I've watched the vid and was impressed, the thought of being able to seamlessly switch between direct and parametric modelling and still be able to adjust all the features whether in parameteric or direct sounds impressive...however will the reality live up to the hype......
Also the being able to create configurable BOMS through windchill is of interest... the proof is in the pudding!! I wait with baited breath!
inviting Windchill to table of potential benefits of Creo thing you limit the audiance to big fishes which are "capable" of resources enough to have it implemented!
small buisness can not afford this so what is whole benefit of customize BOM direct from Windchill about?
if Pro/E would be delivered with some simplified Windchill/Intralink interface free I see a market for it!
Even many Big Fish will have no interest in the Windchill capabilities. I work for one, and the corporate fathers are committed to another PLM strategy. Change of any kind happens very slowly here: we are still on WF3 with Intra/Link 3.4.And while the ability to use either direct modeling or parametric modeling on the same model sounds intriguing (and hard to believe), I still can't see real value in it: the engineers and designers manipulate models, and they will probably stick to one or the other (esp. the tried and true parametric modeling in Pro/E they know so well). The whole concept of multiple users in different roles or skill levels manipulatingCAD datadoesn't reflect the reality of most workplaces.
In my opinion, improving the basic functionality of their parametric modeling package (Pro/E) would be a far more valuable investment. But perhaps this major change in strategy is part of some longer-term goal of PTC: phasing out Pro/E and transitioning to CoCreate. This would be understandable, given Pro/E's antiquity and position in the marketplace, as well as PTC's investment in CoCreate.
PTC swipes aside, I see a massive benefit to using parametric and direct modelling together. Even without a seamless trasistion between the two there is a lot of potential: Direct modelling for concept design work, modifying imported parts and late-stage changes; Parameteric modelling for more controlled design work, top-down design, families of parts and more controlled design.
The ability to explore ideas using a direct approach then start to tigten up the design adding parameters to control feature or part relations would be invaluable.
For our business, teh idea that we can use one package with a common data model on the ID side and the engineering / implementation side is pretty big. The ID folds tend to gravitate to SW (although many, when exposed to Pro/E, then prefer it) and the engineers tend to prefer Pro/E (although, to be fair, some of the engineers prefer SW when exposed to it.)
Of course, many times it doesn't matter what our preferences are, we use what the client requires.
direct modeling seems to come from new direction of engineering - social engineering. "Social" is so popular term now, and added to any advertisment on the web that once you hear it or read it you are sick of that, but...
in this particular situatuation by social enginnering I mean the way to handle the development of products by setting the process on dicussion first. I see this aspect more and more involved nowadays, so I tend to think this is a direction of future. So to make this true, such discasion has to cover wide scope of issues, so wide range of people have to attend. It would be nice to launch common environment for all of them, instead of sitting and waiting for this guy who has to provide the changes in to this something they call Pro/Engineer.
Obviously all attendies would like to push and pull, and change the geometry on such meeting. Now they are locked to the cad user, and complicated interface of making features, drawings, putting values, etc, etc.
Instead personaly I would like to sit with some mobile device connected to main wortkstation and control and play with geometry simultaneusly with others. Once this is done, meeting is over.
And you are right, such data can not be used further because of lack of history, and features. I don`t personaly belive complex device or product can be complited only withing pulling and pushing geometry without history. So there is a must to have someone who would do it. Make reliable model - Cad user, or ...
...or automated process which will convert direct model into feature based one, and this is the way to follow, I bet. One will say, ok, when everybody want to push and pull, without deeper experience at the end what is the need to hire experienced CAD user, or who would likely want to be him/her?
Work distribution to cheaper work force countries - no other way. Westland will focus on design and rough prelimenary data, rest - mechanics, technology, manufacturing will be send away. Sad, but true.
So, you if this is the way, companies are going to follow - social enginnering as I called already is a must, and it will require new tools. Colaboration based, to connect people form different locations. I think something new is coming and we should be ready for this.
All this 'social engineering' talk sounds sweet, and the 'new wave' mantras that are touted by PTC sales and marketing are legendary - but many of them have not (and may never) come to pass. Take drawings, for example. PTC has been hyping the drawingless concept for well over a decade: "2D drawings will go away: everyone will do everything in 3D". It hasn't happened: while a few companies have abandoned 2D drawings, most still use them and have no intention of getting away from them.
To me, the downside of PTC's vision of distributed manipulation of the database is that it requires each user to have their software installed on their individual computer and the knowledge to use it. While this may look good on their sales projections, the investment of time and money is something that many (most?) potential customers may not be willing to invest (esp. at PTC's prices). They will likely continue to restrict this investment to the CAD jockeys. Yeah, an increasing number of these CAD jockeys are in Asia and other lower-cost regions, but the workflow remains the same.
I'm confused. PTC has announced the release of Creo sometime this summer, but their website shows Creo as their current product offering. Which is it: is Creo available (and being sold) today, or is it coming out this summer? It looks and sounds like more Marketing hype from PTC. If I were to order Pro/E today, would I receive WF5 or Pro/Creo tomorrow?
Creo 1.0 hits this spring or summer, Creo 2.0 later this year. However, immediately following the 'Project Lightning' webcast, they re-named pro/E WF5 'Creo/Elements Pro'. That goofy name is a transitional thing (they also renamed CoCreate and Product View), which I think is going to be dropped when Creo 1.0 hits.
So, if you buy today, you get WF5 but with a new Creo-ized name.
Pro/Engineer has been re-branded as Creo Elements/Pro. Similar re-branding has been done with what was ProductView and Cocreate. What is called Creo 1.0 is not available yet. If you were to purchase now you would get Creo Elements/Pro which just Pro/Engineer Wildfire 5 renamed. Creo 1.0 is where you will start to see the release of what PTC calls the AnyRole Apps. So what you are seeing right now is a reflection of the re-branding.
personaly I am interested in mentioned common file format between different Creo module. My concern is about if they try to follow the same approach as Dessault did with Catia V6 database approach.
Saving geometry, parameters and other related stuff witihin database common for all users, build unique environment for all deps and foreign enterprises without dealing of messing with check out/check in process. Simple changing entries in database make it sound simpler but...
so far, I am concerned about potential results of errors invoked in such database and spreaded automaticaly on random entries.
So PTC customers are being misled into believing that the product currently being offered by PTC is significantly different (improved?) from WF5. PTC never ceases to amaze me: they will say or do anything to generate hype.
A lot of it I think is people reading into what they want or think. Understandable though since PTC doesn't really answer direct questions on Creo from what I've seen. You're likely to a response that they're not allowed to talk about it. I never get into the hype because the powers that be probably won't even allow us to update to it for a couple years. Edited by: kdem
So PTC customers are being misled into believing that the product currently being offered by PTC is significantly different (improved?) from WF5. PTC never ceases to amaze me: they will say or do anything to generate hype.
You're likely right that some are looking at Creo/Elements Pro and thinking it's different from WF5, but I don't believe that PTC is doing it intentially. I think it's simply a poorly managed attempt to get their customers exposed and used to the Creo name.
moriarty said:
your a great fisherman Mindripper - throw out the bait and
Windchill is now best son of PTC, Pro/E has to live with all what older brother is up to leave from R&D budget.
Intresting is that budget of R&D is up to be decreased for 2011. Still there is big project of Windchill launched together with Hyundai. Guess - where R&D resources would be invested?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
