SW2008 vs Inventor 11

I guess I should have been more specific. I was just wanting to know
which program was better for a machine design. I don't need to spend
10's of thousands of dollars. I'm not writing programs, nor am I doing
complex surfaces, just plain old machine design. I also do gages and
fixturing.

For the money is one program substantially better than the other?

Thanks

 

I guess I should have been more specific. I was just wanting to know

1. You not going to get an objective answer in a SolidWorks or
Autodesk Inventor group. You're going to have to figure it out on your
own.

2. Neither SolidWorks or Inventor is really any good if you have no
way to easily manage the complex relations that solid modelers often
create.

Suggest you read the link I posted and try and understand what Joel
Orr is saying. Idiots like Gary Kutson and Tom Brewer have no clues.
Since you appear to have not read the link here it is again.

http://machinedesign.com/ContentItem/68359/HowwasthatmodelbuiltSoftwaretellsall.aspx

Your welcome.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Jon, when I read what I write even I don't understand it. Most of the time my lover, Tom Brewer has to explain it to me.

Now it's correct, Nuts son.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

"Jon doesn't treat me with respect because I don't deserve any
respect. See my posts over the last ten years to Usenet. I'm a fucking
idiot and Jon treats me like one.

gk"

Now it's correct Nuts son.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Ignorant:

"Jon, I never forgot any of your postings about SDRC I made the wrong
decision in spite of what you said. There have been a number of times
that my Wife has told me to be careful in dealing with someone and
after words says "I told you so". She earned the right to say it as
well as you have earned the right to say I TOLD YOU SO. I made a
decision that went against my better judgment and as usual it turned
out poorly." .... Tom Brewer

Ignorant:

"I do not purchase programs unless I know before hand that they are
what I want and/ or need."... Tom Brewer who can't follow his own
advice. See above.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer thinking he and his pals like Joe788 can play their Usenet
staking games, lie on a repeated basis and suffer no consequences for
doing so.

Ignorant:

"I have shot myself in the foot, not an easy thing to do when it is
in your mouth and your head is in your ass."... Tom Brewer admitting
what he's often like.

Ignorant:

Someone who has a proven track record of not being able to deal with
or accept the kind of change that occurs in the cadcam market... now
that's ignorant or should we say that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Someone who doesn't live in San Diego yet insists there is no shortage
of CNC machinists here... now that's ignorant or should we say that's
Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Someone who criticizes someone on SolidWorks but has never helped
anyone with specific SolidWorks answers. Someone who is not able to
answer any questions that "Vinny" had on master modeling or skeletal
modeling. Someone who has never posted any models they have done...
now that's ignorant or should we say that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer's failure to understand who Matt Lombard really is.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer's unable to comprehend what's on the cover of the
SolidWorks Bible:

"Whether you're a new, intermediate, ...."

Ignorant:

Someone who can't understand more than a simple "I love it!" or "I
hate it!" type of comment ... now that's ignorant or should we say
that's Tom Brewer.

Ignorant:

Tom Brewer implies that because you acknowledge that the $25
SolidWorks course covers subjects / topics that the $650 SolidWorks
course didn't that you're now somehow an idiot and got screwed when
you decided to purchase the $650 SolidWorks course.

Tom Brewer Writing About SmartCAM:

"I ended up paying a consultant $40.00 per hour for two weeks."

"FYI, when I said "Solid modeling" in reference to SmartCam it was
tongue in cheek. What you could not see is that when I was typing that
I was laughing to myself. Anyone that uses SmartCam and Solid
Modeling in the same sentence cannot be taken seriously."

Recently Tom Brewer said SmartCAM had no user interface problems and
yet the record shows Tom Brewer thinks SmartCAM does indeed have user
interface problems:

"The only real problem that I run into is that the screen can get
cluttered and it becomes difficult to pick and choose elements in Free
Form. I just use the utility masking feature to hide what is in the
way, that cures the problem but it does add work (I tried the snap
filtering and snap options but for me it was not the best way), I
have seen other packages that handle picking and choosing in better."

Conclusion:

Tom Brewer thinks he's a SolidWorks expert. A SolidWorks expert is
someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows
absolutely everything about nothing.

 

[
Franco Folini

UPDATE -- July 8, 2007 -- I had to close this blog post to further
comments and to remove the personal attacks between Jon and some other
newsgroups readers. Before the interview, I made an agreement with Jon
about the style of the interview and the way to handle it. Jon didn't
respect our agreement, posting comments under fake names. Jon's
authentic and fake comments are all posted from the same IP address,
72.199.251.224. I can now see that my trust in Jon was misplaced.
] http://blog.novedge.com/2007/07/an-interview-wi.html


What does it say about you Jon, forging comments and posting them to
your "interview" to make yourself look better, in direct violation of
your agreement with the author?

 

For the money just go get Alibre. It's way inferior to either, but it's
probably all you need, without the Jon-and-Cliffy show

Daisy

 

I know what you mean. I have to use all three well, however I just have Inventor
R7 and was hoping to get some real feedback from those who have used both
SW2008 and Inventor R11. I have SW2008 as well but am not as impressed
with it as some around here (KY) are. I was wanting to know if Inventor R11 was
any better.

Joseph

 

I'm not going to get a straight answer from you either. I could care less
about add on programs that map features. I design machines for the real
world. Rarely do we need to generate some elaborate component that either
of these programs can handle with ease. We get them on paper and get them
into production. I couldn't give a rats ass about someone dissecting how I
constructed my model so long as I can generate it quickly and get drawings
to the shop. IMO, too many designers have lost track of the objective and
spend entirely too much time playing with the software.

Thanks for nothing,
Joseph

 

I'm not going to get a straight answer from you either.

Because you can't understand what the problem is, isn't my problem but
it soon will be yours.

Quick and easy control over all the complex relations that SolidWorks
isn't important to you, eh?

So do many others.

You have no clue what the problems are with the complex relations that
SolidWorks often creates.

So you don't understand or appreciate design intent. Not surprised at
all.

The might spend less time if they had had a high level tool that
easily showed what all the complex relations are in the parts they
create.

Thanks for proving the point of this link:

http://paulsalvador.blogspot.com/

"The reason why SW Corp gets away with releasing half-bake-ware:

Majority rules, 80-90% of the users come from using inexpensive,
inferior and poorly managed design tools. Most of the user base do not
fully use the tool or use very little of the functionality, thus, the
more involved functionality is typically overlooked, poorly critiqued
or supported. Majority of the users expectations on quality are very
low or the need for reliable software is average. Many of the users
come from using past tools with limited functionality, they become use
to or complacent with working around limitations. Workarounds, due to
limitations, have a "at a boy" or a accomplishment related
mentality,.. this is, it becomes an accepted part of the job when
using the software"

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Alibre is pure garbage. He'd be far better off with IronCAD because:

http://www.ironcad.com/product/overview.html

"Traditional CAD systems create what is called a feature tree that
captures the order in which the features were combined to create the
model. When you want to edit a feature in this tree all the features
that occur after that point in the history are blanked out. Software
that utilizes this approach creates a non-productive situation for the
user because many times the feature they would like to reference has
been removed. IronCAD does not have this restriction. A user can
reference any visible feature on a part while making any required
changes. This makes it both easier and faster for the user."

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

And yet another satisfied customer of Banquerbabble. Seems like Jonnie
is the only one that can't get the job done with Solidworks. Maybe the
videos weren't so complete after all. We already know that the SW Bible
was way over his head.

gk

 

So, Jonnie, Ironcad is better because they (Ironcad) say so? Are you
also an Ironcad expert? Why do you have so much trouble with
Solidworks? It must be because your "customers" give you extremely
complex items to design and the rest of us get the "easy" stuff.

gk

 

I guess in the minds of Jonnie, if something is repeated often enough,
it will become accepted as relevant.

gk

 

Now it's correct Madcowman.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

I would suggest my favorite software: BobCAD. Or, perhaps

Now it's correct, Madcowman.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

I'm yet another satisfied customer of SolidWorks. Seems like I'm

Now it's correct Nuts son.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

So, Jon what can you tell me about IronCAD? I'm no

Now it's correct Nuts son.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

I guess if I had a mind I might understand what Jon is saying. If Jon would repeated it more often,

Now it's correct, Nuts son.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Just another buzzword he's heard of. Little (in any) grasp of
what they are or do.
Probably the "graphical" bit some use in their ads got to him.
He tends to be a very "visual" sort of idiot. Not a thinker or
a studier or a doer. Plus he likes the sounds buzzwords make
(though how he pronounces some of them is bound to be funny).
He has to have VIDEOS !!!! (Well-known reading comprhension issues
& disabilities.)

IOW HE already had three of his little voices involved by then.

Who, exactly, messed it up? WHY?
Checks it against WHAT, exactly? Clearly not the CAD model or
the programmer's intent.
And if it's (the parts) wrong ... more clueless MDI edits? LOL ....

[
This is totally unrealistic for
many shops and in many situations...especially when time is of the
essence. (The last five words are great to have in a real estate
contract but only if your the seller.)
....
Same machine but different posts for different people.
]

Remember his posts about always being busy editing his posts for every
machine, operator, shift & part?
If it's right it's right. And "source code" (CLDATA) to one post for any
part shouldwork in any other post for any about machine that can make
the same part the same way.

Find the proper post from clueless and we have another hammer.