Solidworks vs proe

[mgnt8]

I've got a 4 core 3.6 ghz Xeon,16 gb RAM, NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and M010 crashes on me constantly. In fact it just crashed again 5 minutes ago. Switching windows between parts & assembly seems to be the biggest problem.

 

[hnguye14]

I have use both Solidworks and ProE CAD tools in my profeesional career. I am leaning toward SW due to the cost and it easier to use. It's a good call by your company.

 

[proximo]

@mgnt8

Sorry to hear about your issues. We are running similar
systems from Dell and have very little issues with
crashing. I would guess most of our users will have 1
crash a week but many go several weeks with no issues.

We work on Assemblies, but they are not massive. I would
guess about 300 components max. It could be that we
don't have large enough assemblies to experience more
crashes.

SolidWorks lags in the large assembly front in comparison
so I would imagine it would be worst. I do think
SolidWorks has a great product and it's the reason why
PTC is trying to refocus their efforts with Creo to make
an easy to use CAD system. I think with time Creo will
mature and improve or at least that is the hope. So far
we are happy with what we see from Creo 2.0

SolidWorks has some areas where PTC needs to learn from
such as easily moving components in an assembly to mimic
the actual motion of the parts and the Animation is much
easier in SolidWorks. Creo has many areas were it's
power is far superior to SolidWorks but this may not
matter to companies who make simpler models.

The bottom line is that competition creates better
software for us. Without it we would be hurting on
either front. SolidWorks has to improve because of Creo
and Creo has to improve because of SolidWorks.

I enjoy using both although I use Creo far more often
because it's our CAD tool.

The cost between them are about the same now but most
everyone knows this already. It boils down to a personal
preference based on specifics that you require to achieve
your goals. In some cases SolidWorks would be a better
choice and in other cases Creo is a better choice. If you
did not have a choice and are forced to use what your
company provides, I think either one can achieve your
goals with pros and cons for each.

Nothing is perfect and there will never be one piece of
software that pleases everyone.

Edited by: proximo

 

[dross]

I've got a 4 core 3.6 ghz Xeon,16 gb RAM, NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and M010 crashes on me constantly. In fact it just crashed again 5 minutes ago. Switching windows between parts & assembly seems to be the biggest problem.

Sounds like a graphics driver problem.

 

[proximo]

I walked around to ask my users about crashes and they all
said they do get them but to my surprise it's very rare.
Most of them are saying 1 crash every few weeks is normal.

I also have a few users who claim they crash rarely and
have gone months without crashing.

I personally have not experienced a crash in over 2 months
or so.

I agree with @dross in that you should check your drivers.
The software is far more stable than you are experiencing.

 

[proximo]

I have use both Solidworks and ProE CAD
tools in my profeesional career. I am leaning toward SW
due to the cost and it easier to use.

 

[mgnt8]

Sounds like a graphics driver problem.

All drivers up to date

 

[CLBrown]

Well, I've been using Pro/E since 1996, but have used a few other tools (IDEAS, Autodesk INVENTOR, and now Solidworks).

Yes, my new place of work is a Solidworks house. So I'm in the process of learning the ins and outs of Solidworks right now.

The bottom line is that Solidworks is really designed for simpler work. It does some things much, much more easily (at least in theory)... weldments come to mind. Weldments are something that can be created in a single "part" (just sketch the lines, and choose from a menu of pre-defined structural steel shapes, and the thing largely "auto-defines.")

On the other hand, getting complex designs done in Solidworks is sort of like performing home dental surgery. For example, SW has only just now implemented "conic sections" as sketcher features, and the implementation is, at best, "marginal" right now. By contrast, I've used conics in virtually every complex model I've done in the past five years or so. The only way to get anything but "basic shapes" (circles and straight lines) in Solidworks, really, is to either use splines (which are not really mathematically defined shapes) or to create an equation and create a sketch-from-equation.

That's just ONE example... Solidworks lacks a lot of tools I want to have available. But it has a lot of "shortcut" tools.

There are also big issues with the model tree in Solidworks. I'm sure someone thought that these were "good ideas" but I disagree. See, the model tree isn't really a "workflow" representation. If you do a pattern... the patter is moved to the end of the tree. If you do a cut, in an assembly, that is moved to the back as well (after the patterns). You can't do a pattern (representing putting plates on, for example) and THEN do an assembly cut, then assemble something else on top of that, in sequence. NO... in SW, the model tree order for assemblies is, in the end, completely irrelevant.

Also, in assemblies, the constraints used to assemble a part are not directly available. Instead, they're all clustered in a "mates" category (always at the end, just before the patterns at the end of the model tree). You can't just click on a subcomponent and "edit" it to access the assembly constraints. NO, you have to right click, ask to "show mates" and then choose which mate you want to edit, then "edit" it with another right-click. It's just painful.

Another issue with "mates" (what Solidworks calls all their constraints, while "Pro/E" only calls MATES "mates")... you are not permitted to "overconstrain" anything.

Why would you want to do that? Well, there are lots of reasons. I use this, in Pro/E as a design error check. If I have a plate which mounts with six holes, I'll align each of the six holes. If something downstream causes one hole to move, the assembly will "fail" at that point. I WANT THAT. I want it because I'd rather find the error in CAD than find out that a hole doesn't match up only when it hits the production floor, and I have to shut down the production line and re-make the parts. If the assembly constraint exists in the real physical model, I want it in my CAD model. Solidworks simply doesn't allow that. Which means more work, long-term, for me.

Now, for the sketchers... both have major issues. In Solidworks, you have to manually create every single constraint. It takes ages to fully define a sketch, compared to what it would take in Pro/E. But in Pro/E, the "assumptions" are really too robust, so if I try to create a line which is one degree off horizontal or vertical, it will always "fix it" for me. I can temporarilyl disable that, but if someone loads the part next year and regenerates it, that will become a vertical line, no matter how well I've defined it. I've learned a trick to get around that, in Pro/E... but it shouldn't be necessary. So... frankly, BOTH have major issues with their sketchers. The best SKETCHER I've used, so far, is the one in Inventor... it makes assumptions, but lets me disable them and LISTENS TO WHAT I TELL IT, without trying, over and over, to tell me how it's smarter than I am!

Overall... I'm underimpressed by Solidworks so far. Compared to Pro/E, it's a lot more painful to do the sort of work I'm trying to do... but it does have enough "shortcut ease-of-use" add-ons tacked on that people will prefer it in those cases.

Look... if you're using Pro/E... you should stay with Pro/E. If you're a small company who does lots of structural-steel work... and never does anything especially complex in form... Solidworks is slightly less expensive (not as much as they'll claim, though) and thus is a good "starter application."

I've already decided that I'm only treating SW as a "stopgap tool" until I can transition this group to the software we really need to get things done right.

 

[proximo]

CLBrown

In Pro/E or Creo, you can disable any constraint assumption
on the fly with a simply right click of the mouse. The
first click locks the constraint, the second click disables
it. This allows you full freedom to draw a line that is
slightly off from vertical or horizontal with no issue.

 

[msummers]

Good insights CLBrown, I agree with your assesments.

 

[josephlordy]

Solidworks all the way.

I can work 5 times faster on Solidworks, it is much nicer to use.

Pro Engineer is extreamly laboured and difficult to use. There are many confusing things such as the abbreviations it uses for functions...if I don't know what the function is how can I know what the abbreviation of the function is?

And the config.pro. What a shambles. In solidworks I get 'Tools' 'Options' and lots of tick boxes to set options I want, nice.

People who push ProE are wrong.

 

[MarkEngr]

I'll say amen to that from now to eternity. ProE/Creo is a hideous program that does not attempt to implement user's suggestions much to the contrary of DS/Solidworks. Solidworks has grown exponentially due to their Open-mindedness; the company listens to its users

 

[dgs]

And the config.pro. What a shambles. In
solidworks I get 'Tools' 'Options' and lots of tick boxes to
set options I want, nice.

This si a debate that will never die. I use both but prefer
Pro/E. While I may be able model faster in SW, I can make
far more robust models in pro that I can manipulate to my
will. I can make change after change and the model will
update, SW is not nearly as flexible.

As far as the config.pro, yes, it's a bit old school, but
again the flexibility is unmatched. I can distribute company
standards via config.sup and load multiple config files to
match client standards and personal preferences. Most
importantly, I can manage all of this on the fly and
remotely, distributing new settings to my entire user base.
You can set up a custom install for SW, but once SW is
installed, you have no control and no means of maintaining
consistency throughout the company. You cannot even point
users to the company templates reliably.

The are each good programs, with their strengths, but for my
work Pro/E is hands down superior.

 

[proximo]

And the config.pro. What
a shambles. In
solidworks I get 'Tools' 'Options' and lots of tick boxes
to
set options I want, nice.

This si a debate that will never die. I use both but
prefer
Pro/E. While I may be able model faster in SW, I can
make
far more robust models in pro that I can manipulate to my
will. I can make change after change and the model will
update, SW is not nearly as flexible.

As far as the config.pro, yes, it's a bit old school, but
again the flexibility is unmatched. I can distribute
company
standards via config.sup and load multiple config files
to
match client standards and personal preferences. Most
importantly, I can manage all of this on the fly and
remotely, distributing new settings to my entire user
base.
You can set up a custom install for SW, but once SW is
installed, you have no control and no means of
maintaining
consistency throughout the company. You cannot even
point
users to the company templates reliably.

The are each good programs, with their strengths, but for
my
work Pro/E is hands down superior.

I agree. With the proper training, Creo is very easy to
use but very powerful. I have former SolidWorks users
who claim Creo is easier to model with.

I also configure Creo to do exactly what I need it to do.
When a user launched Creo, It knows what license to give
that particular user based on their username. This makes
it easy for me to make sure the users have the apps or
extensions (old school) they require to do their jobs and
it's done on the fly with a script I wrote.

I can also upgrade the Creo build while all users are
actively using the software and the next time they exit
and relaunch Creo, they are running the new build or
version. It has a lot of power and flexibility that
makes a difference for big companies.

I think SolidWorks is a fantastic program and I know how
to use it well. Creo is also easy to use but when you
open up the power under the hood, Creo can do more.
Edited by: proximo

 

[ProE_Addict]

I

100% custom mapkeys

I

independent Copy Geom

 

[herb]

GOOD LORD,PEOPLE!
This is a useless discussion. Everyone has their
preferences. One is no better than the other, when all is
said and done.
Pro/E vs, Solidworks
Chevy vs. Ford
My team vs. your team
Just make the most of what you have and get the job done.

 

[proximo]

Some responses are based on "Chevy vs. Ford" but others who
use both are highlighting their experience with each so
that others can make their own decision.

There is not a bad choice here. They are both great but
depending on what type of work you are doing, one may work
better than the other for you.

 

[CLBrown]

I'll say amen to that from now to eternity. ProE/Creo is a hideous program that does not attempt to implement user's suggestions much to the contrary of DS/Solidworks. Solidworks has grown exponentially due to their Open-mindedness; the company listens to its users

This is the sort of thinking that I find just utterly BIZARRE, and remarkably self-centered.

It's one thing to say "I prefer this program," or to give pointed, logically-supportable statements of what features are important to you and how each program meets, or fails to meet, that requirement.

It is something entirely different to say "that other one is 'hideous'" or so forth.

Realize, every time you say something like that, you're not merely insulting the program... you're insulting those who disagree with your personal OPINION.

You just told everyone who prefers "program A" over "program B" that they are idiots who are just not as smart, attractive, and just generally EVOLVED as you think you are.

Sheer, unadulterated egotism.

I am currently in a position where I am using Solidworks. I have used Pro/E extensively throughout my career. I have also used other tools. And that's what these things are... TOOLS. Not RELIGIONS.

I am able to get MOST of what I want done, done in Solidworks, but there are a great many things I want to be able to do which I am literally UNABLE TO DO in this software. Things that I've done, over and over, throughout my career. And now, I'm rendered unable to do these things at all.

I'm no "religious zealot" regarding Pro/E (or, if you really like marketing buzzphrases, "Creo"). It has more than a few faults, and some of them are pretty significant. I've had to learn "work arounds" for many of these issues.

But... the same goes for Solidworks. And thus far, I've found that SOME thing I want to do simply cannot be done within Solidworks. I find myself "faking it" and "accepting approximation" of things I could do very, very rapidly and very, very accurately in Pro/E. I find things which I could do with just a few "clicks" in Pro/E which take orders of magnitude longer to do in Solidworks. And then, there's the fac that Solidworks really doesn't seem to do very well with large assemblies, compared to Pro/E. Things which would run very smoothly on even slightly older hardware running Pro/E, I've found to bog down a Solidworks seat running on newer, more powerful hardware.

So... FOR HOW I WORK... Solidworks is, frankly, the inferior program.

For how YOU, PERSONALLY, work... Solidworks may be the superior program. Or maybe just the one you personally prefer... either way, it hardly matters.

The bottom line is that it's a tool. The WORK is what goes on in your mind. All the CAD software is, is a way to communicate what you're doing inside your head to others. The "best tool" for you is the tool which allows you to most effectively move that information from your grey matter to the grey matter of someone else.

I can work with Solidworks... though I am fast coming to hate the lack of a number of key features I'd be making use of if I had them, and I'm fast coming to dislike the "kludges" which separate "design intent" from "CAD model structure." Given an option, I'd use INVENTOR over Solidworks... but I'd use Pro/E over either of those.

And that's given all the acknowledged faults of Pro/E. For me, it's simply the best tool available for the job I want it to do for me.

Your mileage may vary. But please, stop calling me (and others) stupid for not agreeing with you on your own preferred tool. And, for the record, when you say the sort of thing you said earlier, that's EXACTLY what you're doing.


Edited by: CLBrown

 

[MarkEngr]

what a rant...self centered? Na, I want a tool that is productive, logical & fun to use.


I have simply pointed out the reality that has existed for 15 years & called no one an 'idiot' which you implied. There are those of us who would like to see ProE change for the better. U Can't handle it, then tough.


One of theCad programsin questionhas a much more user friendly interface-SW, always has. Pro-E largely refuses to add enough necessary productivity enhancements that reduce modeling & assembly time; it hinders more than helps. Toolbox in SW comes immediately to mind here along with several everyday items that only improve from one release to the next.


& there is not an Insert constraint in my version of ANSI Y14.5 nor have I heard of the sheet metal term 'y-factor' in any prog/text other than ProE. Numerous others can be stated.
Edited by: MarkEngr

 

[proximo]

CLBrown

I agree 100% with you. I would like to think more people
think like this than the example you pointed out.

SolidWorks is fantastic. I personally can do more with
Creo but this does not mean it will be true for you. I
do very high end surface modeling, relational controls,
Inheritance functions that are just better in Creo.
Someone who does not require some of these functions will
find that SolidWorks is perfect for them. If you do many
animations and rendering, you may find that SolidWorks
out of the gate is a much better tool for this and I
would agree.

They are tools and if you use them both you will realize
that they are both very capable tools. In the end you
must choose one or one will be chosen for you. Once that
decision is made, just learn the tool and live with it's
shortcomings because they all have them.

Well said CLBrown.