Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Pro E vs. SolidWorks

It's interesting to me here many folks are saying how much better SW is than Pro|E, over on the SW forum inthe 'Pro|E vs. SW' thread (which is mostly pretty old, the SW side seems much less active) folks are mostly saying that Pro|E is better.


I guess the grass is always greener.
smiley36.gif
 
If you do some research, you will find out that most people here and elseware are running wildfire 2.0. I am comparing SW 2000 to proe 2.0 and I believe alot of people in the real world are running these versions? We as well as a lot of people we work with have cut maintenance long ago, so I guess you would have to say you are comparing "new" versions of both programs or compare what most people are running in the real world?
 
cncwhiz said:
If you do some research, you will find out that most people here and elseware are running wildfire 2.0. I am comparing SW 2000 to proe 2.0 and I believe alot of people in the real world are running these versions? We as well as a lot of people we work with have cut maintenance long ago, so I guess you would have to say you are comparing "new" versions of both programs or compare what most people are running in the real world?
Click to expand...


How did you speak to MOST PEOPLE in the "REAL WORLD" in a span of less than 24 hrs? Did you take a poll or ask two people. I think most BUSINESSES and this is just my thought, not scientific, are no more than a couple version behind.
 
I cannot believe that CAD users in real companies - which does not include bootleg users of outdatedversions - are running CAD software that is no longer supported under maintenance contracts. And I cannot believe that SW's VARs are supporting SW 2000 or SW 2001. Specifically, there was a giant leap forward in SW 2004 and SW 2005. so no legitimate user should be running anything older than that. SW 2006 and SW 2007 were fairly minor enhancements.
 
There was poll on the other site a few months ago and user by far were using wildfire 2.0. Go check it out. I hope you are not referring that I am a bootleg user? This would be an insult.
 
bootleg...?? it's free..or was which has the 2001 modeler if you want to update cncwhiz..


[url]http://www.solidworks.com/pages/products/xchangeworks/index. html[/url]


but better still just go to one of the sw demos at their office.. if it's practical .. they might have a timestamped 2007 .. which looks good


maybe someday one of them will get it all together... I have a feeling that SolidWorks will before PTC ..


.. so cnc... just ProMan or is there Mcam or SurfCam.... what's your feeling on the manu. end
 
If people are using Solid Works 2000 I feel sorry for them there have been so many improvements to the software since then SW 2008 kicks the A.. of most newer versions of pro/e in terms of usability and efficient modeling techniques especially in the Area of Top Down Design which in solid Works is much like an Inheritance feature created with the Insert Part tool in model creation You can create a master model that contains surface boundaries for a model to define how parts fit together and insert this driving model into the parts and delete the geometry that your part doesn't require. You don't have to go through the Publish Geom features because you decide in the driven parts which geometry from the Model you don't need. You can create a Delete Body feature to get rid of the surfaces you are not going to use the easiest way is to Delete the References you wan't first then delete the rest of the surfaces and Get rid of the Delete features for the surfaces you want It's a different methodology but it's a lot better than the One part creates all other parts methodology which reduces the amount of people who have control over the parts.

In terms of Power vs. cost Solid Works is a way better tool and what you pay for is worth it. Also they have people in the US who offer support and don't ignore customers. PTC used to be a Respectable Company but their dedication to the Jurassic Period is definitely making them choke themslves. I'm sorry but Pro/E is to self involved and is losing customers because of their overpriced CTRL key centered Object action obsessed Interface. I don't want to spend half my time converting what used to be easy despite the menu manager to the Wildfire It's easy if you know how to Wildfirize your Idea.

Eventually Pro/E decided to create a feature recognition technology which Solid Works has had for years. It makes it a lot easier for users to switch to Solid Works because Features can be recognized from neutral or straight Pro/E files. Reroute is sorely lacking in Solid Works but I'm planning on addressing that with some enhancement requests. However If you want to be able to modify the features included in a pattern Pro/E will leave you gasping for air. Solid works makes it so easy that Pro/E looks like an idiot. I remember a point when a group could be edited to add or remove features. I believe it was 2001. Solid works Contour Select and Selection Manager tools are ideal for using a single sketch to drive multiple features. Solid works used to be like Pro/E and require you to create another sketch and use Use Edge to use a sketch more than once but users complained and they improved the interface. It seems that when ever Pro/E tries to make things easier it just FFFFs Things Up.

PTC can Bl-- Me

MJC > PTC
 
It's funny to me how folks will say SW or Pro|E suck because of this or that and then tell me how the other is clearly superior. Then they go on about how the bad one is loosing customers, etc. No facts or data, however. I can't say if one or the other is gaining or loosing, don't know if there is such a study. I know that PTC claims that Pro|E is not slipping, but actuallygrowing faster than the overall MCAD market (15% vs. 5%, as stated at PTC|User in Tampa).


In my recent experience with SW 2006 (I'm now working with 2007 and appreciate that you can now save a model in insert mode.), I was surprised to find just as many stupid little annoyances as in Pro|E. Like setting a part transparent makes selecting hidden edges real hard. Like the measure tool sometimes deactivating itself after clicking the first reference. Like not being able to dimension to surfaces and edges failing when you redefining a feature. Like not being able to find where a sketch is in the model tree. Like having a hard time distinguishing between mates that constrain that component and mates that constrain something else to that component. Like not knowing where the sketches are in the tree.


If I had been on SW for years I'd dismiss these things as just being the way it is. But Pro|E isn't that way. Of course, Pro|E won't let you move on and fix it later when something fails like SW (which is great).


They're both good tools, I like Pro|E better. To me, SW feels less robust. Can't put my finger on it, it just feels less capable and like I'm getting close to the limits f its capabilities and I'm always working around it's limitations. A good portion of that is probably me trying to do things the Pro|E way, the same is true of SW folks coming to Pro|E - they keep trying to do it the SW way.
Edited by: dgs
 
DGS,


I agree with you when you say SW seems less robust and I used SW for 4 years before using ProE. However, given the choice, despite all those things you mentioned which I largely agree with, I'd still use SW for the majority of my work given the choice.


Michael
 
robust-capable of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions <robust software> (www.m-w.com) Definetly not pro/e. Please use another word, like clanky or cumbersome, Jurassic maybe
 
Wyslvester,


I run pro manufacturing. Never played with MC. For the most part in the proman WF2.0 version the menues are pretty much the same. My issue with pro man from the older versions to now, is that whoever built it never machined a part ever! I end up using "customize" or "trajectoy" a lot of times when doing milling? I have a question for some of you people that are running "newer" versions of pro. Is it true that theynow have put in a pipe thread? If they did, did they do this for pro man thread milling?
 
Mindripper said:
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.
Click to expand...





Maybe you should learn to use ProE before bashing it?


Last time around, you didn't know how to put a tolerance on a dimension properly, now, you think a separate file is made for a family table? NOT!


You think you have to verify instances prior to saving the file? NOT!


It seems to me you don't really know how to use ProE, so therefore it's difficult for you to do anything in it, hence the bashing.
 
No, I don't do anything that complex. If I am doing thread milling for a NPT, I create a helical sweep, protrusion. Then I place a curve on the sweep. I then do a trajectory milling sequence and pick the curve. This will do the thread I need to cut. I would like to see any software "SW" etc be able to do this. For all of this back and forth which software is better, can solidworks do what pro engineer does as far as being able to update the model and the post out the new code with revisions? I believe most of you SW users have to use an "IGES" type of file to run cam? I this is the case SW will never compare to pro engineer.
 
Isn't there a "law of software upgrades" or something?

Screw up on feature for every couple of new ones you add?

Unfortunately, they will not meld the best features of SW & Pro-E & separate out the klunky parts of either. Its just is not likely.

You live with the idiosyncrasies of each while we wait for a brighter crop of applications engineers to create the next paradigm.

Look at what Unigraphics promised its SDRC I-deas users when EDS swallowed SDRC! They said they were going to have a conjoined application - that was at least 5 years ago.

I have had enhancement requests sent in that showed up in the application 6 & 8 years later.

Makes me appreciate what Apple computer did, when they moved to re-invent their OS ontop of Unix. Its just not so easy to make a clean break.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top