Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.
I know this topic is brought up quite frequently, but I am just getting to know both systems and I would like some opinions with some personal experiences between the two.
proe is much more reliable than solidworks as i feel becuz solidworks generally says many things can do but practically it fails logically in case of complex job but in case of proe the capability and reliabilty remain in complex or simple both type of work.
Based on my years of research, here is what I've been able to determine.
Pre 2001, Solidworks was a 2nd rate system suitable only for chop shops & school kids. Post 2001, Solidworks is the millenial gestalt that has saved the world by bringing 3D to the masses such as chop shops & school kids.
Pre Wildfire, PTC was the industry standard with a complexity suitable for highly paid engineers who could master it with their jedi-like concentration & intuition.
Post Wildfire, PTC is an engineering leviathan, so cumbersome only an overpaidjedi could figure it out.
Although Pro/E is still my favorite CAD program and is definitely the most powerful, Solid Works is improving at a much faster pace than Pro/E they have brought forth many usability enhancements recently and it works much better in a windows based environment. Their selection functionality far surpasses that of Pro/E. SW v2008 now has bidirectional BOMs where Part Parameters can be added from a BOM and get created in the Part automatically is quite impressive.
Why use move item to view when you can hold down Shift and drag dims to the view you want. They also have a much better constraints manager in Sketcher that allows you to understand any problems that may occur causing constraint conflicts. They have also improved their relations capabilities now with more Trigonometric Functions available.
Other improvements include useful commands and recently used commands in Right Click menu and the ability to customize it. Instead of having to hunt down icons or using tons of menus you can easily find commands you need.
Once again, someone has opened the can of worms on the everlasting debate of CAD packages. Many years ago, the debate was which is better, an electric powered eraser or a manual eraser...
No matter who you ask, you'll get an opinion. Opinions are free, facts are not.
The fact is, no matter which software you use, there will be positive and negative aspects that you will learn to live with.
Our company uses Pro|Engineer WF2. We've been using Pro|E here for over 15 years, and we'll continue to use Pro|Engineer for many years to come. For us, there are multiple benefits, specifically in the Large Assembly management realm as well as the Mechanisms and Sheetmetal realms. Our assemblies generally contain over 3000 parts and take anywhere from 5-15 minutes to load up.
I personally have played with Solidworks, and found it very cumbersome with larger assemblies, but then again, I'm not an expert in it.
Here's what you really need to do...
1 -Figure out whatyour needs are. Do you need a 3D CAD tool to work with simple designs, or are your designs highly complicated? Both CAD tools provide you with varying license configurations, the more you buy, the more you get. Figure out which package best suits your needs and cost constraints.
2 - Don't rely on Demo pages on the Web. I've seen hundreds of demonstrations, by both sides of the argument, and I'll tell you what, anybody with a little skill can make a software package sign and dance. Demo's are flashy and really cool to watch, but it doesn't show you what you need to know...can the software do what I need it to do easily and affordably?
3 - Once you've committed to a CAD package...LEARN IT! Learning is a lifelong process. I've been using Pro|E for 12 years now, and I still don't know everything that there is to know about the software. I am still finding cool little tricks that help my efficiency levels. I don't care what CAD tool you use, and I don't care what the "experts" say, it takes time, dedication and determination to be effective with a CAD package.
Finally...I've watched too many companies buy into someones opinion and go towards one CAD package over another..without first doing their homework. Look at the names of the different companies that use CAD...although I'm not sure of the Solidworks market, the Pro|E market is pretty impressive...
John Deere; Caterpiller; Lockheed Martin; Toyota; etc... these are some pretty big names using Pro|E, and using it very effectively...of course...your company might not need the same toolset that these guys do...
Do your homework...make a direct comparison...and avoid opinions...
Joel ; Universal Instruments MCAD Coordinator; Binghamton, NY
No one has mentioned some of the underlying basic issues regarding the TOPIC here: administering SW vs. Pro/E. I have spent six years running both SW and Pro/E: I ran Pro/E from 1997 to 2001, then ran SW for six years, andhave beenrunning WF for the last six months.
A CAD adminstrator spends a chunk of his time on the following tasks. My opinions on the winner in each area are apparent.
Training/Ease of Learning: SW, by many light-years. Period. There is no argument here. Yes, many admins get involved in training new users and users new to the company. This is a core issue.
PDM: PDMWorks is easy to use, fully integrated and intuitive. I was playing with SW2k7 the other day: it now has a built-in feature called 'Pack and Go'. At the touch of a button, you can load the cureent assembly and all of it's components onto a memory stick, so you can take it home to work on it. Do you think that's a user request that somebody at SW heard and listened to it? Intralink is a nightmare. It's difficult to use (few to zero error messages that are intelligible, not integrated, slow and inflexible), and is obviously a third-party Unix (actually Oracle) application running in Windows emulation mode (as is Pro/E). About the only thing you can do within Pro/E is check in a file - and then only if it has been properly configured (in advance) in Intralink.
Config.pro vs. 'Options' (configuration management): config.pro is cryptic, and the list of 'hidden' options (a listing is available only from third parties) exceeds the official number of options. Many of the most intelligent and useful options are disabled by default. Deciphering the royal hieroglyphics for each option can be tedious at best. Entire books have been written about the myriad of confusing config.pro settings. 'Options' in SW is easy: most are self-explanatory and easy to figure out. The fact that Help actually works in SW is also a blessing here. There must be many Pro/E administrators who spend hours trying to straighten out the config.pro settings of the users in their company: I'm going to guess that SW administrators don't spend much time straightening out their user's 'Options'.
And what about 'Help'? Will PTC ever figure out that 'Help' is supposed to HELPFUL? They have had product on the market for something like twenty years now, and they still can't figure out this most fundamental and elementary requirement. CAD administrators should not need to guide users through functions: this is what 'Help' is supposed to be used for. I'm sure many Pro/E administrators spend hours a week answering questions that are easy to answer - but users know that 'Help' sucks in Pro/E, so they call him first.
At my current employer, there is no 'CAD administrator' or 'guru' for Pro/E: the dozen or so users are left to their own devices. Nobody wants the job, and experienced users carefully avoid being too helpful, as they might just inherit the position that way. We have a 'Intralink administrator', who (wisely) constrains himself exclusively to that role, carefully avoiding any involvement with most Pro/E problems (other than installing upgrades). Those of us who are new to Wildfire waste huge chunks of time trying to figure out the beast. I guess this makes the more experienced users look more valuable to management.
Let's face it: Pro/E has no 'Easy' buttons, but SW is packed with them - and they are adding more with every release. Personally, I think 'Easy' is good, but many old-timers who refuse to see the light think otherwise. I guess the adage 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks' has some truth to it: it certainly does at my current employer.
SW is more intuitive than Pro|E. PTC just doesn't get how to do easy to use. There seems to be a mindset that hard is OK for a sophisticated CAD package. As SW matures and the capability gap narrows, they are proving that assumtion wrong.
Pro|E has deeper and more robust tools for sophisticated and complex geometry. One of our ID guys, and biggest SW fan, has learned Pro|E over the last year or two. He now says he prefers the fine control Pro|E gives him over sophistcatedgeometry that isn't available in SW. If you're doing complex geometry and surfacing for consumer products, you'll appreciate Pro|E. (Keep in mind the point above on ease of use, however). If you're doing simpler parts like machine design, you'll appreciate the ease of use in SW.
While I agree with Mindripper point on the quirky terminology in Pro|E's config files, I have to say I love the control they give me a tech Pro|E admin. I can set up files that lock down some options and pre-set others to help my users and to achieve consistency across the company and still allow users the ability to set the other options as they see fit. I can provide across the user base mapkeys. I don't know if that's evenpossible in SW. The tools to manage them, however, are either absent or crude.
They are both good products. Both have ups/downs. I have found that most companies do not totally utilize the power of Pro/e and learn quicker with Solidworks.I've trained andhave doneadmin on both, Pro/e, v17-wf1, SW, 97-08.
From a trainer and administrator, SW is hands down easier. Check into the maintenance cost, training cost, equipment cost, new hires w/experience, etc. Weigh all the factors.
Here is an issue that I think needs to be addressed in this topic. Lets say that you are tired of proe or SW and you want to change to the other platform. You have hundreds of parts built. How do you migrate to the other software?
Here is an issue that I think needs to be addressed in this topic. Lets say that you are tired of proe or SW and you want to change to the other platform. You have hundreds of parts built. How do you migrate to the other software?
With difficulty and a hell of a lot of legacy STEP/NEUTRAL files that become very awkward in the future, followed by the inevitable redrawing/remodelling of everything for the new 3D package when management get sich of Engineering complaining.....
So the only real issue in this topic is which software you "prefer". If you are using one of the programs and find thru topics like this one that you like what the other software has good luck changing to it.
I have 18 years in solid modeling as an engineer, administrator and manager in both ProE and SW. The opinions you read where the author instructs you to carefully learn the packages and evaluate your companies needs and user skill levels, are the opinions you need to take into consideration.
I would like to add one more point here. If the decision is made, not taking into account long term productivity then it is very likely the wrong decision.
For example, with all else being equal:
1.) If it takes 50 percent longer (lets say one year) for a user to become proficient in CAD package "A"than in CAD package "B"
2.) CAD package "B" is 10 percent more productive than "A" (once a user is proficient)
3.) You plan on using the CAD package for ten years (or until your departmentmanager retires)
Then package "B" is theobvious choice.Productivity cost will far outweigh the software and training costs. I am always surprised how often the CAD sales people from both company "A" and "B" neglect this.
Comments:
PDMworks: As of SW2005 was not a real PDM package but more of a file management package. For example you could not retrieve an assembly with all the latest released components (not the latest In Work components or the as submitted components). You could not force all the sub-components to be released or added to the ECR when you released an assembly. Intralink (partially integrated) and PDMLink (fully integrated) are slow and too cumbersome for small to medium sized companies. PTCdoes not havea product to fill this market.
Pack and Go: I am very glad to see SW has finally incorporated this functionality. Pro/E has had it as "File / Backup" for decades and now has "File / Save As / Zip".
Configuration options: As of SW2005 SW does not have the capability to lock or check user configurations to company standards. This is a real downfall in large organizations. ProE needs to improve the user interface.
I have to say I agree with Mindripper's comments about the help files. </DIV>
When considering CAD packages I think you also need to consider the features and capabilities from a negative point of view.
What does the software package not do(or do very badly) that the company needs to do or would like to do?
While any particular package may have many wonderful features it only takes one showstopper to render the software a millstone.
For some users it is advanced surfacing or perhaps native data exchange with customers / vendors or even data management within the company. For us it large assembly management. We currently have 3,000 - 4,000 component assemblies that load in 30 - 90 seconds. We want to be able to create assemblies of 10,000 - 20,000 components without requiring supercomputers or excessive load times. We know of one local manufacturer with SW that was waiting over an hour for their typical top-level assemblies to load.
I also know that when one of our customers tries to import a 3,000 component STEP file that we created, SW poohs itself.
You may also ask yourself the question - in a multiuser environment - how often you end up in a "resolve" situation, where you freeze and suppress a bunch of items to quickly get to the point you were working, and end up making the wrong conclusions in your design.
If you are switching CAD platforms, changing from Pro/E to anything else will be a daunting task. But there are companies that sell 'translators', and you can be sure that Pro/E to SW is well-supported by them. Many companies have made this switch.
Pro/E is better at complex surfacing and large assembly management. SW is superior in every other respect, particularly ease of use and a fully integrated file management system. As someone pointed out, Intra/Link and PDMWorks are NOT true PDM packages: they are effectively useful for CAD file management only, in my experience.
Pro/E is considered a high-end CAD system, while SW is considered a mid-range CAD system. Yet SW has almost all of the capabilities of Pro/E, and continues to improve significantly with each annual release.
From an administrative and user stanpoint, SW is much easier to deal with. But if you need complex surfacing, SW just doesn't measure up to Pro/E - yet. But given the pace at which the two CAD packages are devleoping, SW will be on par with (or better than) Pro/E within a few years in every aspect. And given the ease of learning SW - especially for Pro/E users - the handwriting is on the wall.
You may also want to consider support/maintenance in the comparison between ProE and SW. Ever since ptc moved their support to India, it has been terrible. Also, ptc corporate is a nightmare to work with. When those guys learned about "customer service" in business school they misunderstood and took it to mean that the customer is supposed to serve them! My experience with SW has been just the opposite. Their support has been through the local VAR and has been excellent. They have even driven over to my office to drop off the latest service pack CDs--how's that for customer service! Also, no mystery in knowing what I am buying with SW.I have Flex 3C with ProE, but that now has been superseded by XE, SE, SE-xtreme, or whatever the heck they call it now. Maintenance has been horrendous--we eventually dropped it; staying at WF 2.0. Solidworks is much better: set price for clearly idenfied configurations with set price for annual maintenance. And, maintenance that actually provides some value for the $$ you shell out.
Weighing in... I am new to SolidWorks as a user, but it ain't bad. And am no CAD administrator.
SW has moved a number of things to the top of the "tree" as far as accessibility for high traffic features that you use a lot. PTC could learn something there - and undoubtedly they will in future rev builds of Wildfire.
The learning curve is a tiny bit less daunting in SW.
It involves less clicks than Pro to get some things done.
Its probably easier to move from Pro to SW, than SW to Pro-E as a user with any experience.
Hotkeys/macros are far more limited in SW.
You can use only one character with modifier keys - so the ones that mean something get used up fast.
SW is more closely based upon the winDoze interface from the revs I am familiar with. (mixed blessing there).
There are a few things Pro does cleaner.
SW does not use dot revs for past saves - so there's no easy going back in the design (I suppose you could load Flashback to regain some of that functionality).
You have to be innovative enough to set up smart mapkeys in order to facilitate your work flow in Pro to best advantage. Not everyone is organized enough to do that well.
Important: how easy it is to use infrequently used features or modules? You can't take a refresher class when you need one you've forgotten. Neither package truly excels there.
But it keeps design specialists who are not fully degreed engineers employed!
Divison of labor: Paying fully degreed engineering rates to do CAD modeling? Doesn't seem like a cost effective move when engineer's time could be better spent analyzing, etc. Why pay for a 4 yr education to do Associate Degree work for less money?
Data managers & the amount of babysitting they require is going to be a big ticket.
There is some way to edit geometry imported from another CAD system in SW. Don't know if it works as well as advertised though.
No CAD system is "intuitive" without a lot of work or previous experience any more than there is a unique & intuitive way to do icons! (They both have ugly icons by the way, but SW may be the winDoze cheesiest).
Relative design speed isn't all its cracked up to be on any CAD package. There are other factors which enter in.
Depending upon the speed of the design cycle where you work, actual application speed may not be a mitigating factor if its a big project that is carefully designed & well researched.
So it may be more about how easy it is to adjust your design to new directions/design changes. That is partly a function of how well the models were built. If you work interactively in a group & you blow away a hole in the model that someone else is assembling to downstream - being 5% or 10% faster when you created it, doesn't matter so very much.
If you ever think about changing jobs - market share becomes important, in order to have a lot of choices.
I'm too new on SW to say that it has any decisive edge on Pro. Depends on what kind of work you do & in what environment. Both gotta beat the daylights out of SDRC I-deas & Unigraphics! Edited by: gamauf
gamauf: If you save to the Vault in PDMWorks, retreiving old saves is incredibly easy in SW. You can even include comments about the save. PDMWorks also has a nifty icon-based system for tracking what's out-of-date and whether you own it. And of course, PDMWorks is a fully integrated Windows-based applicationfor SW, unlike Intralink, Windchill, etc.
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.
