SW vs INVENTOR

Our company is trying to find a suitable 3D cad system. We do not make
plastic parts - mostly straight edged steel parts.

What is the better program?

SOLIDWORKS or INVENTOR?

/Peter

 

Take Inventor from LEGO

http://www.lego.com/eng/create/inventor/default.asp?id=4093

Very comfortable for straight edged steel parts.

;-))


CU
J.R.

 

What CAD Software does LEGO use to design it's toys?

 

Peter,

I saw on your website that you are currently using MDT and COSMOS. Have you
explored the MDT to SW conversion tools. This tool converts parts,
assemblies with feature history, and also creates linked parametric drawings
that match the original MDT drawings.

As far as modeling your straight edged parts, SW will do a great job!

CAD Guy

 

A while ago, I heard that LEGO is developed with UG, but
not realy shure about that.

Cheers J.R.

 

Peter,
The only way that you are going to know is to test each in a thorough
evaluation of your concept to retirement workflow on a representative sample
of the products you create. I would also seriously look at Solid Edge from
UGS (the owners of Solid Edge, NX, Parasolid (used by Solid Edge and Solid
Works), D-Cubed (used by all three products)).

Ken

 

Inventor is built on newer technology.

Glad you like it, but there's nothing new or especially innovative about
it, just new to ADSK. Development on Rubicon / Inventor "technology" ( =
database management, GUI) began almost 10 years ago. Most of it's
foundation was laid by contractors and people long gone if the flat,
erratic development curve is an indication. ACIS 7 with a few minor
changes (aka ShapeManager; nobody clambering to license that one) is the
geometry engine. Alibre is on ACIS 13 (Along with a nice set of ancilliary
applications. Would be interesting to see a comparison between the two.).
It's an ok program, but way overpriced for what it does well.

 

Inventor is NOT easier to use or learn. this is utterly misleading. Both
cannot do the same, SolidWorks can do way more, do not be fooled by feature
comparison. Check out feature depth, sure "impostor" can do a fillet but can
it do a face blend fillet, a full round fillet a variable radius fillet,
(blah blah) this is just the fillet argument.

Inventor is NOT built on newer technology, it is built on OLDER technology
which it licenced then bought (at a development stage) from Dassault
Systems, the parent company of SolidWorks. The rest of the world is using
ACIS v13 but IV users are stuck with Global Shape Mangler, a bastardidation
of ACIS v10 or whatever, (someone (exceptJB) jump in here)

Don't get me wrong IV is a great product but don't let the IV guys fool ya.
If you only EVER need to design and make simple rectilinear products then go
for IV (if) it is significantly cheaper than SolidWorks, otherwise choose
the better product.

 

solidworks

 

Yep,

Inventor is a complete dog (certainly up to IV8, which is where I gave
up on it).

A pleasant interface doesn't compensate for the fact that some of the
basic stuff is missing / doesn't work very well. And as for Adaptivity...

 

Yep,

well, i'm a little baffled at the flurry of post's in the inventor group
(adesk). it's mind boggling that so many people seem to have difficulty
understanding how to use the software.

 

Seems they all suck.

http://www.upfrontezine.com/2004/upf-399.htm

Richard

 

Is that why the breeze always seem to be to the north east (towards Concord,
MA)?

Sorry, couldn't resist

Ken

 

I wonder if Evan Yares will ever be a keynote speaker at SWW?

So Evan Yares spoke this at the Intellicad World Conference:

Users want CAD tools that make their life simpler; CAD vendors make
software more complex. [One reason I stick with older versions of
software is that they are less complex.]

Usually the best CAD user in the office is not the best designer, and
vice versa. [Frank Gehry doesn't use CAD, for instance.]

His list of four deadly sins of software:

1. Inadequate performance (largest DWG file seen by a member of the
audience was 180MB and it took four hours to load into AutoCAD. Mr
Yares reported on a MicroStation DGN file that was nearly 1GB,
including all reference files.)

2. Poor usability.

3. Unreliable (crashing, and not doing what the user expects).

4. Lack of extensibility (users trying to make the software do things
that its designers never thought of).

The only products that are well conceived and implemented are database
engines, compilers and Google. No CAD products. IntelliCAD has the
advantage, he noted, that it doesn't have the problem of overwhelming
success that locks it to its market.

 

If you get both programs as demo, be sure to save the Inventor disk.
They make swell coasters. I almost upgraded my coaster with the latest
"spam disk" AutoDesk sent. Then I got to thinking, I am not ready to
"upgrade" my coaster just yet. The Inventor demo is still doing fine
at keeping the moisture off my desk.

Regards,

Sean

 

Doubtful. But he won't be invited to AutoDesk University either. I had the
"pleasure" of listening to Mr. Yares at COFES last April. He started a
conversation with me and Sean (a top-gun Inventor guy - www.mcadforums.com)
with the same "software sucks" mantra that he spewed at Intellicad. In fact,
he boasted the only good CAD system was one that his organization was
planning to (or currently is) develop. Riiiight. I looked down at my cell
phone and made a quick "I have to take this call" exit. I left Sean there to
fend for himself (that's what he gets for using Inventor).

Keeping in mind the agenda of the OpenDesign (formerly OpenDWG) alliance, I
wouldn't expect anything less from Mr. Yares. His style is in-your-face as
evidenced by the report on his speech.

I love the part about IntelliCad not being locked to it's market - what the
hell does that mean? It's an AutoCAD clone for crying out loud.

Richard
Don't forget to sign up for SolidWorks World

 

I looked down at my cell phone and made a quick "I have to take this call"

Yeah, thanks buddy. <phhttt>

His take on software was a bit radical. Sure software needs to be better but
to think you have all the answers is a bit cocky.

--
--
Sean Dotson, PE
www.sdotson.com
Autodesk Inventor Certified Expert
Sidel, Engineering & Manufacturing Manager

 

Inventor is dog pile. : )

 

You know I really thought we had all made it past the "my CAD software is
better than your CAD software". I avoided this NG and lurked for so long
because this type of attitude ran rampant. I'll admit it was similar in the
IV newsgroups but I can confess that I tried not to participate in those
threads. It was refreshing to run into users like Ed Eaton and Richard
Doyle at COFES who gave Inventor the respect it deserves. Sure they like
SWX better an sure a few lighthearted jabs were thrown back and forth, but
there was a mutual respect.

Both packages have pros and cons. I have both. I use IV a whole lot more
than SWX but I find that SWX can do some things better than IV and vice
versa. I think that anyone who chooses a package based on the few "Inventor
sucks" or "SWX is garbage" posts they get in these NGs is a fool. They need
to test them out in their setting to see what works best for them.

As for our attitudes, I has thought we had all finally gotten to the point
where we could acknowledge each other as peers and realize that people will
choose different software packages (AutoCAD/IntelliCAD, Windows/Linux,
PC/Mac) and not sum up the other guy's choice as a "dog pile". Guess I was
wrong...

--
--
Sean Dotson, PE
www.sdotson.com
www.mcadforums.com
Autodesk Inventor Certified Expert
Sidel, Engineering & Manufacturing Manager

 

......some people are really easy to bait.... have a nice weekend Mr Dotson
;o )