Solidworks vs proe

[proximo]

We are not talking about areas that most people don't
see. I am talking about everyday core features like Sweep
and Swept Blend.

It's not a good comparison in my opinion. I have used
Office products for years and have never seen or needed
VBA functions. The everyday user would never see these
things, but if the Print button was not on the UI and
only shown on a pull down menu. Everyday users will
notice this every single day. This is what I am talking
about.

I don't see how anyone could defend PTC on this issue. I
pay a lot of money and YEARLY maintenance for their
product and they can't convert the core features to the
new UI after 5 versions of their software?

Come on people. Let's call it what it is. PTC lost it's
focus on CAD and set their sights on PLM.

I sat through a Webinar that PTC put together about the
future of the company. CAD was barely mentioned and no
product information was given about Pro/ENGINEER. The
had many slides about PLM.

I hope the new CEO brings the focus back to CAD.

 

[mjcole_ptc]

7 Pages pretty short for Vs. Rants Glad I didn't look at the 33page one yet. maybe it just has a lot of sneaker adds.

Most of what Pro/E has put into WF5 is to make it more like SolidWorks in terms of Sketcher. Ellipses have been possible in Pro/E for a long time but before they came out with the ability to place them at an angle other than H/V axes Rotate one and you were limited to 90 degrees at a time which has been that way since before Intent Manager. The only workaround to this was to create the Ellipse using a conic with elliptical rho value and a series of angle tangents and symmetry constraints. Another thing that annoyed me about Pro/E was having to select the constraint you want and then pick the entities. SolidWorks has had the ability to CTRL select entities and give you choices based on selection. They even have a context toolbar that pops up to show you the constraint. Pick 2 lines and you can make them Equal and Perpendicular with two clicks. Now Pro/E can do this but notice he severe lack of icons. I remember making my own icons for sweep by copying the picture in the Model Tree.

For the SolidWorks fans out there. SolidWorks stole the Feature Manager from Pro/E's Model Tree and even had the idea to patent it. Major Failure for Pro/E. SolidWorks Feature Manager cannot be detached like Pro/E and can only show a few data columns. Pro/E's capability of filtering items in the tree is great however don't try to make the Column Width 2 characters the min is 3 and if you try to go lower you get a 300 width column. (Pic 1)
SolidWorks has a View Shortcut icon for dimensions however it only controls dimensions in 3d Sketches. Many SolidWorks users don't like fully dimensioned sketches so this might not be bothersome. SolidWorks shortcut keys can be customized but you'll soon wear out your CTRL SHIFT ALT TAB keys cause there is no way to have a multi key shortcut like Pro/E and even Inventor can do.
L for lines means no way to have LCSO = Layer Create SOlid mapkey. SolidWorks does have a neat new UI including Mouse Gestures and their Customize tool allows you to find any icons or print out the key shortcuts into a printable document.

Pic1

What Pro/E needs1. Ability to use 31+ char filenames including symbol chars besides #$%^@ you've probably typed worse language without needing "_" for spaces. Sometimes naming files requires a Masters in TXT Messaging.

2. Allow planes to be resized without Edit Definition-Display. (Possible in SolidWorks)

3. Be able to use a portion of sketch curves for a feature without internal sketch copy. (SolidWorks destroys proe in that respect especially with Derived Sketches)

4. Ability to control Spline combs per curve without using Saved Analysis.

5. Datum Graphs that have readable dims and can be edited without Redefine.

6. Inclusion of If Then statements in Equation Curves.

7. 3D Sketches without using ISDX.

8. Multiple Perimeter dimensions per sketch. (Try to dimension more than one arc length)

9. Ability to highlight a Layer with >500 items.
"Items in this layer exceed 500 items, and cannot be highlighted."

10. Ability to import Tables with more than 250 rows into drawing privilege.

11. CTRL+Drag copies entities in sketch.

12. Ability to have Sheetmetal Feature in Tree instead of separate Part type. (Pic2)

13. Possibility of simultaneously solving assembly constraints.

14. Ways of selecting items 1 by 1 or with selection boxes like SolidWorks has. Edit Selection style options that can be used.

Pic2

What SolidWorks needs
1. Copy Paste features that work for sweeps Lofts etc. without Library Feature.

2. Global Reference Viewer Parent Child UI (in development)

3. Sketches that can be imported saved and don't require a Part file to exist.

4. Smarter Sketch Expert that prompts for action to solve overconstraint.

5. Ability to resize dialogs in Property Manager (what good is a list of 20 selections if only 4 can be seen.)

6. Ability to select Datum points as references.

7. Reference Patterns, Multi dimension patterns patern linear and increase depth of feature.

8. Axis features that don't flip direction or order of references after creation.

9. Create points at intersection of circle/axis and plane. (Give me a side 1 side 2 option if multiple intersections)

10. Ability to use planar 3D sketch curves for revolve feature.

11. Conics with Rho value. (These can be driven by equation in 2d sketch but UI is terrible)

12. Larger Model Space 500m Diameter is the Max. you can sketch a point or line outside of this but the sketch will disappear and be unusable.

13. Ability to switch units and keep same size not same dimensions. (v18 of Pro/E could do this) NASA couldn't.

14. Allow import of System Customization while SolidWorks is open. Pick up a version of Pro/E and look at Tools Customize File Import Settings. (Pic3)
Of course you'll have to reread the registry settings but who decided to place the system settings there in the first place??? Allow a text file like Customize.sldset to be used

Pic3

I loved the this is how I feel about proe emoticon posts and have laughed my a$$ off more than I have in a while. It's good to let frustrations out but the key is to force the Software Companies to listen to their users. Kudos to PTC for removing the Resolve Mode. My zr zs zc ze zm zi mapkeys aren't needed so much anymore.

Do you want to exit Resolve Mode Y/N?
Are you serious Pro/E?
zr Resolve > Redefine
zs Resolve > Supress
zc Resolve > Clip Suppress
ze Resolve > Edit Refs (Reroute)
zm Resolve > Fix Model
zi Resolve > Investigate

Michael

Edited by: mjcole_ptc

 

[dgs]

Here's my wish list for ProE:

1. I'm completely with you on file names
2. Fix all the maddening UI goofiness. I'm not talking about the lack of a complete WF UI (although that would be nice), I'm talking about:
   1. Assy constraint fields that truncate the reference info
   2. Text fields that are highlighted, but typing produces nothing
   3. Family table editor that looks a lot like a spreadsheet, but functions nothing like one.
   4. Inconsistent use of the middle mouse button - alternately next, cancel, new, OK or nothing at all.
   5. Consistency in general - for example, in standard mode it's 'Edit Definition', in failure mode it's 'redefine'. Standard mode editing a dim takes a double click, in failure mode it's a single.
   6. More, more, more - there is a lot of this stuff. Try teaching an intern Pro/E, you'll find yourself saying "No, you can't do <obvious, natural action>, you have to <odd series of clicks & picks>)
3. Easy way to open a generic from an instance
4. Make units and mass props just work. Report weight, here on earth, as well as mass. Give em a way to change it so if I'm designing moon rovers, I can calculate that weight too, but it ought to just work, out of the box, for this planet, period. Don't know hoe many billable hours I've lost to just setting up assemblies to report the weight right.
5. Give me action-object or object-action - everywhere. Some commands are one, some the other, some both.
6. Give me a robust, 3 click measure tool showing me very basic measurement available for the two items I chose.

I'm sure there are more.

My SW wish list:

1. More flexible features. Want a variable round? Better pick it up front, 'cause you can't change it later. Same with neutral plane vs neutral curve drafts or protrusion vs. cut vs. surface. Makes for a lot more rework when things change
2. An easily repeatable measure tool. The tool is great, for one measurement. Need to check several things? Tedious.
3. A means to manage installation configurations company wide. Each user controls their install, no way to distribute config settings company wide, either to enforce standards or to make sure everyone has a certain enhancement. Pro/E is very, very robust (if a bit clunky) in this regard. I pass mapkeys & menus to all of my users as Pro/E launch.
4. Expose entity id's in features. If I select 17 edges in a feature, looking at the list they are lines 1-17, no clue as to what feature they belong to.
5. Easier to read sketcher constraints. Those little Chiclets are ridiculous.
6. Leave the blasted sketch in the model tree where it was created. Create a sketch as feature #5 then use it in feature # 30 and it's absorbed into feature 30 and disappears from the tree. Now there may be features between 5 & 30 that are children of the sketch, but they appear before their parent. Need to insert a feature after the sketch but before feature 30? good luck. Just leave it in the tree, please.

Again, I'm sure there are more.

 

[proximo]

@mjcole_ptc and @dgs

Thank you for the great informative post. We can all
agree that nothing is perfect and improvements will
always be requested.

I also use SolidWorks but I am not as proficient with it
as Pro/E due to the years I have invested into Pro/E. I
guess part of my rant has to do with the amount of time I
have spent with Pro/E and the feeling I get that PTC is
no longer focused on CAD as they where in the past.

I hope this changes in the near future with the new CEO
or Project Lighting. One thing for sure is that
competition drives innovation in many cases and we need
both of these CAD systems to stay on top of their game.

 

[McCormickN]

Iturner_frl:


I depends what you're using the software for and what other components you are using (i.e. PDM software). Don't let anyone tell you SolidWorks is less expensive than ProE. It's not. And don't let the SW sales guy tell you you can import ProE files and maintain parametrics. This only works if you design hockey pucks.


I work for a design firm and have been using SolidWorksfor aboutyear (painfully).I have a list of complaints if you would like me to forward it (provide me with your email address).


If time is of any concern on your projects, don't do it. Mouse clicks are trippled in SW.

Let me enlighten the situation. Cumbersome & painful are the words for ProE concerning mouse clicks & panning, zooming, travel time,etc., as compared to SW & its lovely shortcut menus. The scroll wheel should not be used as a command termination or Enter as ProE users so admire. You can import ProE part model files with a great deal of success into SW directly, providing you have the right file format exported from ProEat hand (Parasolid 1st & Step 2nd) & are utilizing SW's excellent Feature Recognition tool. Even Native Pro files can be brought into the later versions of SW with good result utilizing Feature Works/Recognition & youare given the optionof recognizing if appropriate as a feature driven solid or sheetmetal part. Can you do that one on ProE?, please tell. SW is more successful in this regard than the other way around &I'll put money on that. For once, try it the correct way before you pass preliminary judgement. I'm not a SW reseller but a long time user on both platforms & Pro_E has a lot of catchup to do in this battle.

Hello,


At our office we use both Pro/E and SolidWorks and they are both wonderful tools. Both are less than perfect (obviously), but ifwe had to pick one it would certainly have to be Pro/E. The BIGGEST difference between the two can besummed upwith three words... parameters, relations, andmapkeys. This low level control of Pro/Engineer is what truly sets it apart.Pro/E alsomakes it easier to work on very large assemblies, and not need a supercomputer to get the job done. The customization options with Pro/E really make a difference when you get into drawings. In Pro/E the flexibilty of the Mapkey tool with respect to User Experience customizationis lightyears beyond any comparabletoolin SolidWorks. This result in MASSIVE time savings accross am entire TDP when properlyconfigured mapkeys are implimented.Thereare obviously things you can do in SolidWorks that are similar. Custom Properties and Macros get you part of the way there, but when compared to the overall control you have over ProEngineer it is just a scratch on the surface. Of course this simplicity does work in SolidWorks favor some of the time. A great many users don't want to have to be a "Guru" to use their tool and they don't want to spend hundreds of hours fine tuning their tool for optimal performance. They want an out of the box solution that will be easy to learn and will bear fruit ASAP. I do believe this is still SolidWorks greatest advantage. The learning curve for SolidWork is much less severe and it truly does an all aroundgreat job. I would compare the SolidWorksuser experience withthat of an Appleproduct.It is more of the"This is what we offer, take it or leave it" experience than the more"open-ended" approach that PTC takes.However, the things that SolidWorks does do it does elegantly.


As I said before they are both AWESOME tools and we need both of them to fully serve our customers. Basically it boils down to the fact that Pro/E is HighPerformance but High Maintenance whereas SolidWorks is Easier to Control/User Friendly but Less Flexible/Powerful.


/end2cents


Please forgive any typos or grammatical errors. I don't have time to proof read!

- Nat

 

[proximo]

I just hope the people who created CREO where not the same
people who designed the Wildfire 5 UI.

CREO could be a fantastic product but what scares me is the
recent history of bad UI design and ease of use.

 

[ddm_user]

Really take a hard look at where the 2 companies are going right now. PTC just announced their new Creo Products. Solidworks is moving away from the parasolids kernal and aligning more with Catia. Catia is a closed architecture system. What does that do for SW? There has been talking around different exploder groups about what they are doing with their 3rd party developers.


We have both products and unless you have some of PTC's higher end extensions there is no price difference. I recently heard that SW had just raised their prices. Can't confirm this. We tried their Enterprise PDM and it was terrible. It could not manage ProE files at all. It could barely manage SW files. They use search paths in the config. Right there it tells me it is not a true data management tool. We had to switch off of it.


Ease of use is the other point that kept coming up. I want a tool that can design our products. We have high end engineers that are capable of learning and using any tool. To me it's just a tool. I focus on functionality first. Ease of use is down the list. If you are using Wildfire 5 and have seen where the next release(s) are going you are seeing the future.


That's my 2 cents worth.

 

[proximo]

@ddm_user

Good post.

I have high hopes for CREO because I want software that
let's my Engineers design great products but at the same
time it's intuitive to use.

WF5 has so many broken UI elements that make the software
harder to use than it should. It's like PTC has
different departments building different areas of the UI
and they don't communicate.

Hope CREO is different. I hope they focus on
functionality and ease of use equally.

 

[mieke-s]

We had same discussion,


it ended in favour off Pro/E because of the use of inhereted features ( wich was more complex in SW )

 

[jraquet]

To the pros:


I have about 20 years using Pro/E (so I am a bit biased) and have played around with SW whenever I get complaints from my students about "how much easier it is".


Our students are introduced to basic 3D modeling functions freshman year and are required to use it through a four-year design sequence built into our curriculum. Presently Pro/E is my package of choice and it appears the students pushing for SW are the loudest majority but am not sure if their reasons are clear. There is a group of upper-class students who give the opposite appraisal (please don't touch SW - stay with Pro/E).


The simple features should be about the same, my sell is that learning one is an easy transfer (theoretically easier Pro/E -> SW than SW -> Pro/E) but I also have an "advanced" course where we continue the basics with family tables, sheet metal then Blends, Sweeps, Swept Blends, VSS, surface modeling, reverse engineering and a big AM/RP component.


I have checked through the raves(rages?) and find the great compares in this post to be excellent but would like the latest and greatest before our big planning meeting to determine what is best for our students and our curriculum.


Thanks for any help.


jsraquet@uncc.edu

 

[proximo]

@jraquet

You make a very good point.

I wanted to remind you that CREO 1.0 looks like it could
deliver some advantages down the road. We don't know for
sure until it's released, but the videos so far look very
interesting.

Maybe you need to hold out for CREO 1.0 and give it a
spin. If it's easier to use but at the same time gives
you the advance features you require, it will be a
winner.

I sure hope CREO 1.0 delivers on it's promise.

 

[r.decker]

To the pros:


I have about 20 years using Pro/E (so I am a bit biased) and have played around with SW whenever I get complaints from my students about "how much easier it is".


Our students are introduced to basic 3D modeling functions freshman year and are required to use it through a four-year design sequence built into our curriculum. Presently Pro/E is my package of choice and it appears the students pushing for SW are the loudest majority but am not sure if their reasons are clear. There is a group of upper-class students who give the opposite appraisal (please don't touch SW - stay with Pro/E).


The simple features should be about the same, my sell is that learning one is an easy transfer (theoretically easier Pro/E -> SW than SW -> Pro/E) but I also have an "advanced" course where we continue the basics with family tables, sheet metal then Blends, Sweeps, Swept Blends, VSS, surface modeling, reverse engineering and a big AM/RP component.


I have checked through the raves(rages?) and find the great compares in this post to be excellent but would like the latest and greatest before our big planning meeting to determine what is best for our students and our curriculum.


Thanks for any help.


jsraquet@uncc.edu

Disclaimer: The following reply may sound like a rant. Good points about the students voicing their opinions. This seems to be a trend of students over the last decade or so (I've discussed this with more than a few educators in a multitude of subjects), that the students expect an easy "A" or to skate through school with a minimum of effort on their part. The students need to understand they are there for an education for THEIR benifit, not for the professor's, if the software is too difficult to use, perhaps they should actually do some homework, practice, and work on what they don't understand. I see both SW and Pro/E, as well as various other CAD applications existing well into the future, and it would be wise for the students to gain as much knowledge as they can in both. I also agree with the fact that if you learn Pro/E it will be an easier transition to SW, where as if you learn the easy way, human nature will dictate that you will always lean that way. If the students do not wish to study the ciriculum then perhaps they should drop out and explore a career in fast food or as a news paper carrier. Frankly, I'd feel better going into a building, crossing a bridge, operating or riding in a vehicle that was designed and engineered by someone who actually earned their degree and has the knowledge, competence, and put forth the effort to do it right (reguardless of software they designed it in) than the monkey who only wants to hit a few keys, click twice, and create a "pretty model".


Just my 2cents worth.... Rand over.


Rodney

 

[michael3130]

Well put Rodney

Edited by: michael3130

 

[smijomt]

@ Rodney, that was excellent eye opener,to those, wasting time on fighting for their preferred tools.

By the way i have considerable amount t of experiance with PRO E WF2 Standalone system and my current employer wants to implement SW along with SAPPLM.

Have any suggestions from where i can start? I am totally new to SW.

 

[ed5cgs]

Hi, Long time Proe user now working with SW.
The "flexibility" that many users talk about SW is reason
why SW is a far inferior product. Why would you want to use
a CAD package that allows you to design loosely and
unconstrained when you need exactness when the item gets
fabricated. There is nothing worse than taking over a SW
assembly when the parts are just added and the if there are
any constraints they make no sense.
FYI, I love using CAD and I make it work with SW but wish I
could use Pro to make my life easier.

 

[jelston]

OHHH MYYY GAWWWDDD!!!

Almost 6 years later and this is still going on?

Edited by: jelston

 

[MarkEngr]

@jraquet

You make a very good point.

I wanted to remind you that CREO 1.0 looks like it could
deliver some advantages down the road. We don't know for
sure until it's released, but the videos so far look very
interesting.

Maybe you need to hold out for CREO 1.0 and give it a
spin. If it's easier to use but at the same time gives
you the advance features you require, it will be a
winner.

I sure hope CREO 1.0 delivers on it's promise.

I've used ProE Creo 1.0 for some time. Same old non intuitive, cumbersome approach. The program needs a proper burial & runs counter to engineering logic & reasoning. I can elaborate in detail if necessary.

 

[proximo]

I've used ProE Creo 1.0 for some time.

 

[mgnt8]

If they figure out all the bugs, Creo will be fine. F000 crashed constantly and was terribly unstable. They seemed to have it fixed in F001, but now M010 crashes a lot again.

One thing I noticed recently that I thought was interesting was that among non-technical management, solidworks has become the generic term for 3D CAD like Kleenex or Band-Aid.

"Send our guys the solidworks file"

"You guys run the solidworks over there" or

HR people filling a job position who have no idea whats going on will ask for solidworks experience even though they're actually running everything but solidworks.

 

[proximo]

Creo 1.0 M010 and Creo 2.0 M010 run just as stable as
Wildfire 5 did for us. We do get crashes here and there
but it's not common.

We run some powerful workstations with 4 cores and lots
of RAM but this may not be a factor. not sure.

In our industry, Pro/E is the common term used by sales
people and non engineers. "Can you send the Pro/E files"
etc.

It's hard to get people to accept Creo as the new name
because Pro/E has been around for 25 years.

Not sure what "Term" is used most as a whole in the US or
Worldwide, but Pro/E has a larger foot print overall.

SolidWorks has done a fantastic job with marketing and
improving their CAD system, so my hats off to them.