What can I expect from Solidw*ks ?

[michael3130]

If you guys love Solidworks so much why do you come into the Pro/E section to fight these battles? Are you on the Solidworks payroll?

Maybe you should check the title of this post and that might point you in the right direction!!!

 

[Mindripper]

I'm with michael3130: it's a great idea to know how to ride than one horse in today's world. It's an even better idea to know how to ride more than one horse at the same time.


This is all about staying employed, right? Not about pet preferences or impassioned devotion? We aren't talking about girls, sportsor video games here: we're talking about putting bread on the table. While one of the contributorsto this topicmay be in the business of hawking Pro/E (education),the restof us shouldn't feel an obligation tobelieve they are tied at the hip to a single CAD product. Indeed, any such devotion can result in not being able to find work. Yes, I am speaking from personal experience. I could write a book on this subject.

 

[solidworm]

what can you expect?
solidworks sweep feature can't maintain the draft built into the profile sketch throughout the sweep path.
there's a demonstration from solidworks (surfacing a razor) which shows this! (2 degrees positive draft goes 2 degs negative).



Edited by: solidworm

 

[michaelpaul]

If you guys love Solidworks so much why do you come into the Pro/E section......

Ummmmm, becasue I use Pro E and have used it for over 10 years. I've also used SW for about 5 years and feel that at least I have a credible opinion to offer about how the two packages work.

You will get a lot farther before you will need to start adding those 3rd party addons.

Pro E is one big add on anyway so your argument fails miserably. Want to do freeform surface modeling? better get ISDX. On PTCs website they list 11 different extensions that you can add to Pro Engineer to increase/improve functionality.
as I said, this argument will never end. go up to the first catholic priest you see and start debating why gay marriage and abortion should be allowed and see how far you get in convincing him. he believes one thing, you believe another. nothing is ever going to change it.





Edited by: michaelpaul

 

[Zaki]

HI All
after watching this thread calmly, I think its better to jump in the pool

I dont understand why people fighintg that my wife is beautifull than urs? Isnt it a waste of time???
I am working as a freelancer from last two year and used Catia, UG, SW, SE, VX, ArtCAM, Inventor, Mech Desktop, PowerShape and Vero etc etc. But I love Pro/E. I have hand-on experiance to cross check any two softwares, but I tell you a giant fact that if you like to compare SW with Pro, its useless and invalid and nonsense. Because its like compare Mercedez Benz with Honda Motor bike.
Catia, UG and Pro could be compared, but not the SW and WF.
I just tell you one bad thing about sw, that last year I made some models in sw 07 for Lees Bradner, and design a complete product for B Cubed LLC. I used some edges and faces as refrence, to keep geometry properly related. As I change the size of that geometry, some features lost the relation. when I redefine it, the dimensions still asking for edge at that size, and its not regenerate automatic.

After that I didnt ever use SW.
SW may has more seats count than Pro/E, u know why??? Its cheaper then it. Beleive me, last month I helped out the Pro Reseller here to sell pro seats. Owners are more interested in cheap products.

Its only matters what you can use best, not a single CAD system is best in the whole world.
Some women has big breast, some has smart back, some may has sexy bum, but you cant say one is more beautifull than other.

If you like booby one, may someone dont like it.

Why you insist on SW is better even you cant call some SW users here in forum and make ur pole better?????
If someone like to learn more than one CAD, he can do it. But its not a matter of fight.
(sorry guys, I appologize if someone dont like my language)

 

[design-engine]

Zaki wrote: "I dont understand why people fighting that my wife is beautiful than urs? Isnt it a waste of time???"

We should take two wives. I'm with that. Then they can keep each other company while I go to the race track!
Edited by: design-engine

 

[Zaki]

hahahahahahaha
I have more than two Bart

. And I am quite happy.

 

[Metoo]

mindripper,


It is not me that is behind the times. You might check who owns the Parasolid kernal and who owns the ACIS kernal, as you wrote:


"You are WAY behind the times, Metoo: SolidWorksswitched from the Parasolids kernel to theUnigraphics kernelabout ten years ago. Yeah, they actually switched kernels: pretty gutsy."


Unigraphics (now Siemens) owns the Parasolid Kernal, andboth Unigraphics productsuse it, as does Solidworks and about half of the CAD market. SolidEdge, when it became a Unigraph program was switched from ACIS to Parasolid. Desault, who owns Solidworks, owns the ACIS kernal, and about half the CAD market uses this 3-d engine.Nevertheless, SolidWorks uses the parasolid instead of ACIS.


Flayl Payne

 

[Mindripper]

Yes metoo, we could both be right: it seems UG uses a variant of the Parasolid kernel. I was quoting an interview with John McEleney from memory.


But consider this advertisement in any case: from today's world -


http://www.solidworks.com/sw/687_ENU_HTML.htm


It would appear that SW is worth knowing, especially ifone of us islooking for work - which will quite likely happen again in our lifetimes. 700,000 users, the CAD software package experience desired by more employers than any other. Think about it. I'll ride any horse they give me, but this looks like one worth knowing how to ride. And it's an easy colt to ride too: well-behaved, steady gait, not easily spooked or finicky.

 

[dgs]

And it's an easy colt to ride too: well-behaved, steady gait, not easily spooked or finicky.

I'm doing some SW 2009 work now and that's not how I'd characterize it. More like stubborn with a mind of its own. Requires constant stiff kicks in the side to move and a heavy hand on the reigns to get it to go where you want it to.

 

[Zaki]

very long ago, we were in discussion. One guy deny every thing. He said I dont accept the crow is black, it is white. then he start to say white for a black one and black for a white one. So we all accepted we are wrong.

 

[jdurston]

I think SW had surface replace functionality before Pro E did but they both seem to have it now.

I'm pretty sure Pro|E has had that as long as I've used it, which is longer than SW has existed.

I have noticed the "Tweak / Replace" function as far back as ProE Rev 17. I think that was back around 1997. So, it may have existed prior to then.

 

[jdurston]

I love that Pro|E lets you select a 'starting item' to measure from and then you can select item after item to measure to. In SW it's one pair at a time.

Personally I find that quite annoying and sometimes it makes me feel like throwing my computer out the window! But I guess one can't please everyone!

It sounds like a matter of preference for most people. I would prefer to measure separate pairs of items, because I end up having to reinvoke the measure command repeatedly to get a new measurement.


Usually, this is not a big deal if you put the icon on your desktop (or in earlier versions written a mapkey) to handle it. In some cases, having the first reference stored in there is handy if you pick the wrong second measurement item or want to get the distance to several items from the same datum.

 

[jdurston]

I love that SW gives you measurements in X,Y and Z all at the same time, plus the vector data. In inches and metric, if you want. And it lets you select from the nearest entity then works back into the model. And you can change the second item selected, just like Pro/E. This has saved me many hours when using SW, and the lack of this simple functionality has cost me many hours in Pro/E. This is a classic example of Pro/E's unwillingness to develop their product or topursue any genuine effort to make their product easy to learn and use. Pro/E's code is probably still in FORTRAN.

Default X, Y and Z measurements would definitely be handy. That would save mea couple of steps.


ProE is definitely not coded in Fortran.


PTC is definitely willing to improve their product. If you have seen the transition to the Wildfire versions (now on WF5) from 2001, you would see that many of the functions are much easier to use than they were before. A lot of credit goes to other products like Solid Works, Solid Edge etc. for putting the market pressure on PTC to improve itself UI wise and otherwise. Competition is good.


I am a long time member of the PTCUSER Technical Committees and so can't talk at length on the particulars of what is being improved (due to non-disclosure agreements), but I can tell you that they have dedicated resources (marketting, technical spec writers, developers etc.) for improving Pro/ENGINEER, as well as their other products (like ProjectLink, PDMLink etc). Many of us would like them to spend more resources on developing Pro/ENGINEER than some of their other products, but some of that is a matter of market strategy and necessity. They are making great progress in many areas.


I am sure similar development teams exist at Dessault for developing Catia and SW. Lets hope that we (the end users) can all benefit from the arms race.

 

[Knut Fiskergård]

These discussions are both funny and frustrationg to follow. I would just share my humble opinion.


We need to recognise that we face quite different challenges in our work. Some may work on different consumer products from week to week, and others may work on tailoring a specific product to fit a specific project. This wouldrequire different functionality from the cad system.


We are currently evalutating Solidworks and Inventor to replace our ProE. The thing we emphasize is probably unique for our needs. I have said, recognising the ability and complexity of ProE, that we are flying a freedom fighter, but would be able to do our work with a cessna. Just consider the difference required in training. And all those "buttons" to click, but I dont know what they do. (oops that was the catapult seat)


I don't care what software is better on sheet metal or surfacing because I do not need it. Flexibility in the drawing module is however a different story. I dont care for counting mouse clicks or how many miles I've moved the mouse, I want to reuse previous work. How to take measurements in 3D or dynamic sections? I advocate to make a drawing. I always make a "basic drawing" when I do my basic design. Here I have control over any sections and dimensions I need.


WE WILL NEVER AGREE ON THIS! Now let me se if I managed to piss someone of

 

[michael3130]

Knut,


I think this post should now end as I believe you have summed up the post with an unbiased view...well done!!!

 

[jvidal]

In some cases, having the first reference stored in there is handy if you pick the wrong second measurement item or want to get the distance to several items from the same datum.

Yes it does.
But how about when you pick the wrong first measurement? arghhh.......

Even if it would take a litle more time here and there measuring the distance from the same reference to several diferent references, I would still prefer the SW way.

It's just one of those things that really pisses me off because I cannot adjust myself to using it.
Edited by: jvidal

 

[tobbo]

It

 

[jvidal]

It

 

[zpaolo]

the difference between us and them is that if we were to smash our computer the way he did, we would be fired and got a new computer 10 minutes later...

And the cost for the new computer would be charged to us

Paolo