A Must Read

Pro/E vs. SolidWorks — a working comparison

http://www.designfax.net/news/stories/feature-1.asp

 

I read it - very interesting as it appears to be compared and discussed
among three people that don't carry an obvious overwhelming bias. Good
points all around.

WT

 

my reply in the comments section for that article:

I'm not sure when this article was written or what version of
SolidWorks PDT is on - but the comment from Steve about SW not
carrying curves across parts is no longer a limitation since SW2008 .
Starting in SW2008 you can insert absorbed and unabsorbed sketches
when inserting a part. There right, this used to be a huge stumbling
block with the CPD designers but not any longer.

I would argue that the master model concept is much more versatile in
SW2009 since we not only best Pro's Publish Geom method but have
several other methods (Split Part, Save Bodies etc.) Consider that in
ProE when doing a Copy or Publish Geom, you cannot even copy solid
geometry (only surface, curve, sketch, planes etc.) – In SW you could
do this from day one.

Bjorn's comment about Pro's file management almost made me laugh - for
instance, you still cannot use spaces or special characters in Pro
file names and the non-windows open and save dialog is very clumsy.

With that said, I still have the greatest respect for the ProE kernel
because I feel it is most robust (geometrically and parametrically)

BTW, I used Pro for 12 years starting with version 16 and ending with
WF2 (my joining SW in fall of 2004)

Mark

 

That is - 2nd only to SolidWorks and Parasolid.

 

Mark..

I'll defend Pro/e since nobody here seems to understand... or thinks
the write up is interesting.

First,... Pro/e still kicks SolidWorks ass in top-down... speed and
managment of data,.. period!

SolidWorks handling of top-down is still SLOW and has poor file
management,... constant rebuilds,.. is a memory hog,... insert part
still sucks... bodies are constantly added or misplaced.

Split part still is not that good,.. better,... YEAH... cuz it really
sucked!

Copy, Merge, Inheritence, Publish are BY FAR SUPERIOR over what
SolidWorks offers!

You're NOT limited with bodies,.. you can copy geom,.. rmb,.. select
"solid surfaces"... or,.. select a body in Pro/e and solidify it.

Hmm,... did you not know how to do it after all of those years?

...

 

also,.. depending on what quilt (body) geometry is present,.. you can
rmb and pick from a list.

...

 

Ah,... sure... AAX is extra. Yeah.. and anyone who knows how to use
Pro/e should know how to share data.

Proof,... hmm.... another engineer....

I'm NOT making sweeping statements ... I use both of these tools and
design REAL products,... really.
I've been using Pro/e since R12 up to WF3 and SolidWorks from 1998plus
till now and yes the 2009 beta.

You guys who NEVER use the TOOL's,... always want proof... and even
then,... it would not matter,.. you'd find a way to justify the reason
for SW being slow and not as feature rich!?

SW2009 FINALLY came out with sharing sketches!?!!? WOW...
amazing...

How long did Pro/e have this............... anyone??????????

.... (why do I feel like a atheist at a gop convention)

 

Quick question, how much does Pro/E cost compared to Solidworks?

 

http://www.tristar.com/news/pressreleases/pr_display.asp?pr_id=12

http://www.tristar.com/software/proe-packages.asp
http://www.tristar.com/software/tlo/proe-packageupgrade.asp

...

 

Time for one of those political posts I get blamed for.
Since I've already been blamed ....
[
I'm voting republican because...


]

 

As you can see from my original reply, I hold a very high regard for
ProE because I spent so much time on it. I am specifically
addressing, and making correction to, only a few areas of the PDT
article. I do agree with Paul that Top's Down design does seem faster
in ProE than in SW especially when complex surface CPD design is
involved. You need to consider that it’s not apples to apples thou
when comparing ProE assemblies to SW assemblies because of the many
differences (and benefits) of SW assemblies.
I still hold to my belief that comparing WF4 and SW2009 master model
techniques are pretty much on par. We have eliminate the known
problems with Split and derive and have now given the user a lot of
flexibility to "Push" or "Pull" changes from the derived part even
reassigning the derive to a completely different the master (and in
the case of split : completely different split feature/s). You can
break references with the master (or mirrored part) and recreate them
in the derived. Since 2008 you now have practically every referenced
type of entity you need from the master.
There is a white paper that has just been published comparing ProE,
Inventor and SW2009 in terms of performance. I will try to get
permission to publish it to the forum in the near future.
Regards
Mark

 

Seems faster... c'mon Mark... it is and let's simplify this or take
surfaces out of this,.. let's say a 100% analytical assembly with 1k
unique dumb brep parts (fairly complex,.. that is,.. lot's of edges/
rounds/holes/fasteners) and no asm constraints.
Sure,.. please send, post, link.. the performance white paper,..
files.... yes, PLEASE!
Oh... if this also includes making changes to the master and updates
to a drawing with multiple views/pages... please let's see that
performance comparison as well!?!?

I'd be happy to compare Apples to Apples here.

IMHO,.. there are only subtle differences with what SW does

The one thing which I feel the comparison mentions is with doing
movement studies,.. it's easier in SW.
As for asm constraints,... I'm very surprised these guys think SW is
better,.. cuz,... it is SO much faster/easier to constraint in Pro/e.
Where I think people get excited with asm in SW is with the multi
window drag/drop... it SEEMS easier.
What I'm still amazed by is why Pro/e has NOT capitalized on a easier
interface when nearly ALL the functionality is there!??

The problem I see with many of todays interfaces are... that niceties
are cute to have and demo,.. but it does not weigh in as a performance
return in the REAL world.

IMHO,... gui changes are todays sales/marketing tools. (attach
bait,.. cast,.. hook,.. reel in a new user)

...

 

WOW!
The Pro/E fourum got Zilch.
You guys know how to dedate!

 

SW Standard = ~4K
SW Pro = ~6K
SW Premium = ~8-9K

...

 

...since no SW user here wants to contribute information to compare
(imagine that?!?!?!)....

SW Standard = ~$4K (+$1.3 annual)
SW Pro = ~$6K ( (+$1.5 annual?)
SW Premium = ~$8-9K (~$2K annual?)

... (not sure about the annual maintenance fees?)

 

You're NOT limited with bodies,.. you can copy geom,.. rmb,.. select
"solid surfaces"... or,.. select a body in Pro/e and solidify it.

Hmm,... did you not know how to do it after all of those years?

Paul, I just read over your comments again. Yes, I DO remember that
you can select "solid surface quilts" (did that all the time) but that
doesn't mean that it was Solid geometry in the derived part - you had
to "solidify it" in the derive after you imported it. That's what I
meant by my comment - Am I correct in that?

Mark

 

That sounds about right.