CAD Systems Comparison

If Pro-e wildfire now has an interface that doen't need such a steep
learning/re-learning curve as before, PLUS is faster and MORE stable
than solidworks and the advanced surfaces package IS included (as per
recent deal offers) ... it really would give me all I ever want in
solidworks, for about the same price & maintanence.

Pro-e wins out over other similar alternatives that are (maybe) higher
up the CAD ladder (VX ??, ImpactSoft) because it has a wide user and
VAR base, an active user community, so native file exchange (with
history/feature tree) wouldn't be a problem, and there would be people
to discuss it with.

I wonder if Paul S would chip in here ?? (as he uses both SWKS &
pro-E ... both 'in-anger' !)

Otherwise i have so much learning time and experience invested in
Solidworks - a move to another CAD package would have to be well
worthwhile......Pity solidworks is so fixed on new 'funky' features to
attract new users and less on stability, and more professional
features.

 

Recent discussion with my VAR indicated that the unhappiness with
Featureitis has resulted in CEO McEleney saying publicly that core
issues must be fixed up first.

I am assuming that users have hammered long and hard enough to where
someone's head started hurting back at SWks corporate office.

Thus I am hoping to see some serious fixes coming down the pike.

 

If Pro-e wildfire now has an interface that doen't need such a steep

I didn't think it was hard to pick up at all. Certainly as easy as Acad /
MDT.

The ISDX deal has expired (Pro/Surface isn't anything to laugh at, tho'),
currently is Mechanica Stress and Thermal, next will be ...?

The rest is subjective.

It will be interesting to see where SW decides to go. Pro/E has plunged
into the mid-range market in a big way, Autodesk has decided to forego CAD
and is trying to create a Leggo Assembler market, Solid Edge going for the
mid to high end, everyone is working on the 2D Acad legacy holdouts, 64 bit
will allow really large assembly work without going to Unix platforms
(won't help those where the performance sucks), ... Interesting times
ahead.

 

"but with all the crap you post here it has already clouded my
judgment"

It doesn't appear that it takes very much to cloud your judgement.
Probably explains why your firm ended up with 20 or so seats of
SaladWorks and now has to change to a solution that can do the job.


jon

 

Bo,

Is thet statement in print anywhere ??????


Mark

 

I hope that they have not been listening to jb under any name ....

 

They probaby only need one or two fancy reference surfaces,
I'd guess.
Goes back to the data interchange issue. And customers & vendors.
I'd think that SW would handle anything from UG with ease as both
use ParaSolid and most aircraft surfaces are, at worst, cubics, AFAIK.

 

Learning time invested in SW is invalidated about every two releases
because of the incessant reorganization of the interface. So you aren't
losing as much. I think one advantage of the old Pro/E "unfriendly"
interface was that once learned, you didn't have to relearn it every
year.

If you don't believe me, add up the pages in the 2004 and 2005 What's
New. Then realize that those are just overviews and that many new pages
would have to be digested just to use all the new "interface" features.

 

Learning time invested in SW is invalidated about

Ah! The "development" shell game. Make new toolbutton icons, shuffle the
interface, add a new feature and some new bugs. (Ad$k magic show, tainted
the whole market.)

That's a little "iffy" as long as WF's UI is being developed. There is a
difference in that you aren't dangling waiting for the next "carrot"
feature, release to release. The biggest difference, I think, is that you
just have to experience the growing pains associated with revamping an
interface to mature, solid foundations vs. trying to develop the
foundations, patch the cracks in the walls, add rooms, ...

 

I ran UG back at v16 and it still leaves a bad taste - I'm a product
designer who takes breaks from cad work as the projects progress and
need different inputs (eg trips to far east, etc.) ... with UG there
was just so much non-intuitive stuff to take in that I had to
're-learn' it everytime after a break. Catia looks good tho' grown up
solidworks ?

BUT .... the Bottom line with both these for me is the cost (incl
maintenence is just too high for my v small biz) . I still also think
they are aimed at the full time CAD user - they have to be really, to
justify their costs - and hence intuitivenes for casual users is well
down the list of priorities ....... but hey, I'd love to be
contradicted on this.

Maybe after all solidworks is the best of a bad bunch and what I want
(intuitive interface, coupled with professional strength power and
stability) will be around sometime in 2012 ;-)

 

I'd expect that learning the new is easier than totally
forgetting the old. And never trying to do things that
way again.
You'd gotten really fast ......