"pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
"pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
(OP)
Pat or anyone, I noticed you have been looking at these software packages since 2005. I am in exactly the same position you were in then. I also noticed you have postings as current as this month (Dec. 2008)on the same subject. Have you purchased one or the other? I am trying to make a decision by the first of the year. The biggest part of my decision is revolved around training. Are there any important questions to ask here? I have no CAD experience and little computer experience. How many hours of training should I ask for? I am leaning toward solidedge classic at this point. Anyone using Synchronous technology? SIS is my solidedge distributor and Trimec is my solidworks distributor. They both seem that they would do a good job for me. Any feedback would be appreciated.





RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Sorry for the delay in responding. With the holidays and other work going on, I haven't been following the forum lately.
To start off, I ended picking SEwST over SW for my CAD system. It wasn't an easy decision though, as they both had their pro's and con's. In the end, there were certain things about SE (the constraint handling, assemblies, and drafting in particular) that I liked better, along with more reasonable licensing and nicer vars. Even with that, I'm still not entirely sure I made the right decision, but I guess time will tell.
With regard to training, as lapuser indicated, it will take some time and training to learn how to use the software (especially as new user). This is true though regardless of the CAD package (SE or SW). What I would recommend is working through the built-in tutorials first, before doing any classroom instruction. You get more out of it that way. Also, what I normally do when working through tutorials is takes notes (especially when I figure something out that, to me, wasn't obvious or intuitive). It takes longer to do them that way, but I find more if it "sticks", and later, when working on my own models, if I forget how to do something, I can usually find it in my notes pretty fast.
Good luck with your evaluation, and I hope my response wasn't too late to be of use. If you have any other questions, post back.
Pat
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
On SE training, as well as the inbuilt tutorials there is some training from Igetit that is pretty reasonably priced. We use if for our interns and it compares fairly well with the in person training they used to get.
KENAT,
Have you reminded yourself of FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies recently, or taken a look at posting policies: http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
--Scott
http://wertel.eng.pro
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
The replies though have been pretty positive for the most part, and despite some second thoughts still feel SE was the right choice. The more I use it the more I like it. Still haven't quite warmed to ST though (the traditional environment seems easier to me). Perhaps that will change once I know it better.
Hope everything has been going well there. -Pat
.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
I was watching this thread and even posted a blog entry that is a little bit related to it.
The nice thing about talking to other customers and not guys like me (I work for Siemens PLM) is that you can be a little more sure that the answer is not so biased. Of course you will also get A LOT more opinions especially if the UI changed like we did in the last release!
BTW, here is the blog. Maybe it will help:
http:
Mark
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
lapuser, - I guess what one considers good (or not) all depends on what you're used to. Since I've never used the v20 interface, I can't really judge how the new one compares. I can say I don't mind it. It seems reasonably well organized, which is especially helpful when you're a new user (and I suspect that was the intent). I'm not sure it's the best arrangement for efficient modeling, which seems to be the general complaint. But as you say, that will likely get addressed in future releases. Imo, the most efficient arrangement is one that uses floating contextual toolbars and judicious RMB menus, and there's nothing in the current design that prevents that. We'll see!
Thanks,
Pat
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
I have to say (from an experienced user's view) that the interface is just not productive compared to V20 - having to swap menus all the time on the ribbon is a real PITA, and the way the pathfinder gets pushed down/up by the select menu and context menus etc is crap and a real waste of space. The ribbon also wastes so much space for commands that are rarely used.
I know I can reposition things to the another side of the screen, but that wastes even more space.
I also know it's intended to look and feel like MS Office (WHY!!! - the commands are different anyway), but at least that does try to remember what commands you've used and keep them handy.
I now have a customised Quick Access toolbar stretching across the whole screen that holds just about all the commands I frequently use - but I can't find a way to reorder the commands on it.
As an example, this morning I went into a new draft file and drew a rectangle - thats one click from Home onto the Sketching menu.
Next I want to dimension it - so I have to click Home again.
Now place a circle and dimension it.
This clicking from menu to menu is counter-productive.
The very least Siemens can do is make the interface more customisable for experienced users.
...but I do like the checkbox in Pathfinder for hiding/showing parts.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
to reorder and to have dividers on the QAT is scheduled for ST2.
The misplaced dimension button will also change with ST2.
It is also possible to have the whole button placed on the QAT
just RMB on the button and select 'Add to Quick ...'
You should also move the 'Save' on a different place on the
QAT just remove and add it again. Not doing so and a tiny
bit to the left you won't have the chance of doing an Undo
any longer. Also note: when in ST-Mode and switch the window
(or just open a different file and go back) will clear the
undo buffer.
dy
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
I noticed that you could create a QAT with all of the main sets of commands thus creating a single set of drop-downs and then do away with the ribbon, but that's defeating the object.
It's really the 'context' menu that changes with each command that I find the most annoying.
It doesn't resize automatically and you cant't change it's layout from vertical to horizontal.
When is ST2 coming?
Will Sheet Metal still require a different file or will it be built into Part?
If it's still a Sheet Metal file I think an opportunity has been missed to rationalise the file types.
Have you seen Space Claim sheet metal? - you can change edges from ripped to bent & vice-versa, thus moving flanges from one edge to another, and you can have 2 windows to show folded and flattened form. There is a video on their web site that shows taking a plastic molded part and making it into sheet metal.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
ST2 is scheduled for the 2nd quarter this year. An, yes I'm
also not very exited about the new UI maybe it's OK for
Word and Co. but for a CAD, questionable I think.
In ST2 the UI might become more customizable but I've
no information about that. One must also keep in mind that
Microsoft is the one who must endorse any change because
he is the patent holder ...
Whether SM will be integrated into Part or not is not known
at the moment. It seems that it will see some major changes
and enhancements. As usual: no information is given by UGS
up to day X.
dy
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Have I changed my mind about it?
NO.
It's still VERY VERY poor, even for a first attempt, and I have found even more things to irritate me.
It's just not consistent - why so many tabs when there is so much unused space on each one?
What the hell does 'Home' indicate? - couldnt they think of a proper name?
Why is the Select command not on all tabs, or the Close and Return ?
Why are some common commands only available from a drop-down when there is ample space on the main tab - eg the hole command in sheet metal. At least the old interface remembered the last one you used.
Why are there different icon sizes?
Re-ordering parts in an assembly - when you drag the cursor to the top of the pathfinder it starts switching pathfinder tabs. Fortunately I can scroll with my spaceball.
We just reported a bug in the pattern part command in assembly. Trying to pattern a screw to a user-defined hole pattern in sheet a metal part throws the pattern in the wrong direction. This is on existing parts, not newly created. Has anyone else come across this?
We are version 100.00.03.03.
I can accept that the interface is different, but to make such a mess of it compared to the old one seems to indicate that they just wanted to get the job out and fix it later if anyone complained.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Let me try to address some of your thoughts. I had some similar questions from one of my blog posts that I'll cut and paste here:
The "Home" word is pretty standard for ribbons. While everyone is right that CAD is not word processing, we have some common problems, ever increasing functionality being one of the big ones. The old UI paradigm was losing steam.
The new UI is more customizable in terms of window layout so if you have a small or larger monitor you can change the defaults to hide the ribbon bar, have windows fly out rather than stay pinned, etc. We also moved UI into a quickbar in the graphics area to avoid mouse travel and keep focus where you are working. I would look at one of my other blogs called "showing the ribbon who is boss". h
Now I don't mean to say there isn't a problem here since the range of monitor sizes (and number of monitors) has just gone crazy in the last year. We are looking at this for our next release.
The new icons in the windows are different sizes. Why? One of the concepts behind the ribbon bars used in so many new products is to make the most used functionality easily accessible and findable. Large buttons are used for the most used functionality and need to stand out. Small buttons are used important but less used commands. You can read more about the ideas behind Microsoft's Ribbon here:
Slideshare:
http://www
Microsoft Blog:
http://
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Thanks for posting here. I can respect someone who goes to front to defend his employer's decisions. If you would, could you look at my post from 01/30 in the "Jumping on ST! Good or bad idea?" thread, as well as the screenshot I added.
Now would you please explain how a micro vertical scrollbar for just one icon improves access? Not to mention that you have 7 icons now, to do the job of the 5 icons we needed previously...
Norm C.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
first: I'm not convinced second who is WE?
- You thought that some buttons should be standing out
- You thought that hiding the side bar is a good idea
- you thought that the QAT is a good idea
and so on.
That's your opinion about the new UI, fine but let me tell
you that I'm not convinced because my workflow is different
from yours. I doubt that you know which functions I need more
often than others and when, I don't need such large buttons
to find them.
My toolbars have only the name in common with an SE OOTB.
They are populated to suit my needs for my type of work.
When constructing a part most of the time only two or three
toolbars are visible along with the main toolbar and I place
them to keep the mouse travel at minimum. This way even on a 19"
screen it doesn't take up much real estate.
Don't tell me the new UI is the one I need because it's
more ergonomic than the current UI (aka Stream/XP) but I
didn't now that. BTW: I'm told that in SWX you have the
option to have either one. At least when 2009 is installed
on a PC where SWX 2007 is installed upon start it will take the
UI layout from the 2007 which has those 'old fashioned' toolbars.
Now the million dollar question: why does SWX handle it that way?
dy
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Please explain - apart from the quick access toolbar there is no customisation. I don't count being able to move a toolbar to sides, top or bottom as customising.
In the old layout I could put the toolbars at the top or side and they would adjust to either horizontal or vertical format - the new ones don't.
The command steps were where they should be - just below where you picked the command, on the smartstep ribbon bar.
View commands were always in the same place - with the other commands not as far away as they could possibly be.
Pathfinder used as much space as possible on either the right or left of the screen as you desired.
You NEVER had to scroll a window to get at a command option or find the hiddden input field - they were always in the same place.
As it happens, last night I installed the 30-day evaluation of SpaceClaim and that has exactly the same interface format as SEwST, but its a better implementation.
In the modelling environment there are only 3 tabs - Design, Detailing and Display. All the modelling commands are available from a single tab. Most of the icons are the same size, a few have a drop-down for other options, and there are no scroll bars.
I think the problem is that the new interface is designed more for ST where you don't have a long history tree to accomodate, but is not good for traditional mode.
I'm not against change - but PLEASE make the new better than the old, or at least not worse.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
I was just cruising through the comments and saw some questions I could answer. I was more trying to explain why things are they way they are and offer some tips than defend anything. Sorry if I messed that up.
Gemnoc - I was following the version thread but I didn't think I could offer anything useful. ST is pretty cool but if you don't need it yet, its not as clear you need this version. Don't know about the micro scrollbar but it doesn't sound right. Have you called GTAC?
donyoung - we = "Solid Edge team" although I should probably be careful. While I work as a product manager for SE, I should say "...the postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent Siemens PLM Software's positions, strategies or opinions." For the UI stuff, I was mainly pointing out there are some other options beyond working with it as it comes out of the box. Personally, as a user, I don't like the QAT and will be glad when the new version shows up. With a new UI, its hard to "nail it" the first try.
Beachcomber - I realize I've got that big "Siemens PLM" label (target?) on my chest but I really just popped in to shed some light on the subject. I'm certainly not the one to be representing the whole product and really can't talk too much about your other question because I'm not the guy that worked on that. I can say that the best way to get these concerns addressed is to bring them up on the Solid Edge newsgroup ( http://bbsnotes.ugs.com/ ) where they can be discussed with other users and then turned into an enhancement request.
Really, I was just trying to be helpful. Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to sell the product
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
None of my comments are aimed at you personally, more a pop at Siemens in general for following the crowd and spoiling a very good interface.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
As beachcomber said, same for me.
The scrollbar sure doesn't sound right, but it's there, since the Ribbon's height is fixed. It doesn't look to me like a glitch, since scrollbars are used elsewhere in the Ribbon. Really silly UI design, to be polite...
Let's hope that SEwST2 brings us more UI improvements than just the QAT changes. I'm hoping for what SW seems to have done between SW2008 and SW2009, which is give back users some customizability...
@ BC: Following the crowd is the right expression. I sure would like to know why everyone in the CAD industry is so enamored with the Fluent interface. Has Adobe adopted it for its CS4 suite? Hell no! Even if they are no strangers to increasing functionality. But then, they're also producing it for another OS.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
http:/
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
All you can do is turn it on or off.
The link actually shows how to customise the QAT, but the problem with the QAT is that you can't re-order the commands on it to create logical groups.
I am sure the new interface is requiring more clicks than the old one.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Maybe you are already aware of this but you may be interested in the discussion called "V20 and ST GUI statistics..." on the solid_edge.misc newsgroup dating of october 1st.
The user made a comparison between V20, ST Traditionnal with the same part.
Hope it helps
Patrick
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
To get back to the title of this thread...
I use SE100 or 21 traditional two weeks now. I gave up on ST because too many things don't work yet. With SW and Inventor I worked several years. With Cadkey / Keycreator I have some experience.
It depends what you use your CAD program for. As a designer and developer my opinion is very clear and simple: Solidworks is the most efficient, consistant and mature program with the least frustration potential with a quite steep improvement curve. It works.
The distributor is also important but the best support can't take away the lack of a program.
Greets Patrick
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
I gave up on ST within about 1/2 hr. I just can't get on with having to put dimensions all over my model to make sure it's controlled.
The 'live rules' is just too complicated and it's too easy to miss something happening on another part of the model.
I tried to adjust a the height of a block with a curved top face and it was a pain.
I'm having a go with SpaceClaim in my spare time, and although it's also direct modelling I seem to be able to do many things easier than with ST - and it's the same 'Fluent' interface but a more simple implementation. It does appear to have it's own faults & limitations though.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
It just didn't seem like you were explicitly controlling things the same anymore.
KENAT,
Have you reminded yourself of FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies recently, or taken a look at posting policies: http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
gdahll
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
It's interesting that the menus don't go across the full width of larger, high resolution screens - suggesting that it's designed for smaller screens such as laptops.
It looks totally rediculous on a 24" wide screen running at 1900x1200!
This wouldn't be so bad, but the replacement for the pathfinder area needs far more width that the pathfinder did.
Hopefully Siemens will recognise that an "Office" interface is not suitable for CAD and put things right very soon.
No doubt Microsoft will change the standard again with Windows 7.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
decision to implement the Office 2007 interface was not
one of their best
dy
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
This has made me to looking at replacment for SE. The most likely candidate is SW since it supports chain of tolerances control that is lacking in SE.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
--Scott
http://wertel.eng.pro
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
So many users complained so long and so loudly to SW when they introduced the GUI, that SW relented and incorporated an option to switch it off. Many users have done this and use the 'S' key set of shortcuts which, in combination with other keyboard shortcuts, is far more productive. No Fluent and no toolbars cluttering up the screen.
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
A little while before SE went 'fluent' SE were circulating links to SW message boards with users complaining about the interface changes. They sent it to us to try and give us ammo in our 'why not go to SW' battles that flare up.
Then, they go and do the same thing.
Idiots.
KENAT,
Have you reminded yourself of FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies recently, or taken a look at posting policies: http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Notice too that Synch Tech is Siemens PLM's response to SpaceClaim's 3D direct modeling. Autodesk annonced recently Inventor Fusion, and let's not forget CATIA V6 released last year has the same type of technology. You don't hear much about it though.
So SpaceClaim, even if it's had so far a marginal market penetration, seems to be a trend setter...
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Actually, I find there are some benefits. The task bar can autohide freeing up screen space.
The UI improvements in ST2 look to deal with many of the other annoyances. But as I said, it takes a fair bit of getting used to because it is quite different, though once you get familair with the layout it is OK.
I have also started to integrate Sync modelling into my workflow. It really was NOT love at first sight and my normal workflows just did not work. It was actually very frustrating. I have perserved though and found that a good understanding of Live Rules and how to manipulate them is essential to getting the desired outcome.
Even though Sync modelling is still a bit "warty" and lacks some functionality, I find that I am now reluctant to use Trad if I can help it. Fundamentally, there is a freedom in Sync that Trad just doesn't give you. I am not even saying it is quicker, I just like it better. It has really grown on me.
Personally, the more I understand it I thinks Siemens have really got something in Sync, but I think the "ease of use" thing is over-sold. It acutally has alot of depth and functionality that is not immediately apparent and needs to be well understood. If you just dip into it you will get frustrated very quickly.
With regard to copying Spaceclaim, I am pretty sure the development of Sync had started long before the release of Spaceclaim. Bear in mind, Spaceclaim launched March 2007 and ST1 in Aug. 2008 - hardly enough time to develop a whole new modeller. That said, the high profile of Spaceclaim seems to have paved the way for the acceptance of Sync. as the next progression of a parametric modeller.
Tony
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
Good to hear that improvements to the ribbon may pursuade those still on V20 to move accross. There is no doubt that the ST1 ribbon has some major flaws, but I don't think they are conceptual, it is more to do with implementation. That said, the Develpoment team seemed pretty responsive to input and have addressed many of the issues raised.
Can't wait to get my hands on Sync sheet metal - it looks very cool.
Did you get a chance to play with the edit by section feature? I am interested to know how well this has been implemented.
Tony
RE: "pkelecy" Solidedge vs Solidworks
MUCH faster in SE from other companies then they can in the original cad program. You will really like ST2 and it will move the fence sitters off to join I dare say. Dave