7 Replies Latest reply on Feb 9, 2016 1:52 PM by Al Griego

    Feel like a plebeian

    Ryan McVay

      Sorry, I'm in hate SW mood this morning- I'm sure you all can relate to this feeling- and I'm in an anti-establishment mood (associating DS and SW as establishment and I'm the poor plebeians!)

       

       

      I originally wrote this comment on a different thread/question and figured that if I posted it would hijack the thread. Honestly, I don't think the user is going to get an acceptable answer to his/her question...so being the polite guy I am here's my response/rant.

       

      These are the types of things that drive me crazy, as a user who has to rely on my software to be consistent, this software appears to have so many quirks that it truly earns the titles of SolidAlmostWorks and SolidQuirks really hold true. Sorry folks I'm just getting really tired of people making excuses for software that appears to hold the #1 spot for mid-range CAD but the company isn't addressing some of the core issues user have and not developing (internally without purchasing something) new functionality that actually improves the design process. We are still stuck in a complete history-based system that relies on a magical "ctrl+q" keyboard function to actually get our parts to properly rebuild! (Let's not mention that this function isn't even important enough to get an icon on a toolbar or menu selection! What? Isn't this the most important function in the entire program? Doesn't it ensure the integrity of my design and 3D data that is being leveraged throughout the enterprise!) Next, the icon we do have on our toolbar is ctrl+b (rebuild) is a hack attempt to calm the masses about regeneration times! Then to top things off lets take all the design validation and regeneration options and bury them across the System options and let's call them all "new" functions. And don't even get me started on the useless undo function. Honestly that is the worst implementation of an undo list I have ever had to endure. Here's a typical answer that DS/SW provides

       

       

      "Question: A model used to rebuild correctly in an earlier SolidWorks version.  Why do new rebuild errors occur, after upgrading to a later version of SolidWorks, on features that rebuilt correctly in a previous version?

      Answer: Such errors rarely occur for the following reasons:  The feature that was created in an earlier version of SolidWorks was invalid to begin with and it has only started being flagged in the later version of SolidWorks after an error checking enhancement has been made.  The feature could have also become corrupted.  There has been a regression in the SolidWorks code.

       

      To work around the issue, delete and recreate the feature that causes the rebuild error.  If the issue is still reproducible and it is a suspected regression, please submit it to Technical Support.  Submit the original model with the new rebuild errors."

       

       

      If I got these types of answers from a supplier I'd be suing them for fraud! Unfortunately software companies cover their arse with MLAs to cover crap like this!

        • Re: Feel like a plebeian
          Christopher Sudlik

          The past month I've had several crashes a day. Most after "start up, open file, dimension - crash" or similar.

           

          Othertimes over several hours it starts acting more and more weird. Planes stop appearing, you can't grab certain lines, things slow down, and then a really bad crash hits. I've never even heard of a software set being so broken before.

          • Re: Feel like a plebeian
            Christopher Sudlik

            If I get the chance to switch it won't be from one of a bad companies products to another, it will be to a competitor. I've liked Autodesk before, but I'd happily try Creo or others. DS has run their course.

              • Re: Feel like a plebeian
                Ryan McVay

                My opinion is that Siemens PLM has the most flexible and stable offerings for CAx. I can say that NX has been the most stable software I have used and it comes with integrated tools from design to PMI to CAE to CAM to inspection. People say it is expensive but compared to the rework and workaround time spent by users to get the jobs done your ROI calculation might says its an investment that might actually save you money. Solid Edge is another option that, once again in my opinion, actually delivers the promise of 3D and parametric modeling. Stretch and pull components in an assembly like the old 2D days. No need to go thru and open 5-10 parts and make similar design changes. These parts don't even have to be SE part files! But the solids still have precise control of geometry and face relationships. SE has the ability to keep you in complete history-based modeling, if you like, or move you model into ST mode (a history-less mode) and work on the data you see on the screen but still have control. You even have an opportunity to work in complete ST mode and the ST sheet metal functions will blow CAD users away. An awesome tool when implemented correctly.

                 

                Onshape and Fusion365 are interesting but I'm not a "data renter" and like to be able to do what I like with my data. Well, I better stop before I get my post pulled because I mentioned to many competitors or information in one posting!

                  • Re: Feel like a plebeian
                    Al Griego

                    I started using SWX in November of 2014. Prior to that I used Unigraphics from V10.4 through NX6. I have to admit, while we did have some issues occasionally, it was nothing like the lockups and crashes I had with SWX 2015. Importing Step and parasolid files is not as simple as in NX. I've had to do a lot more repair work on parts due to gaps and bad faces even with parts that I'd used in NX. Plus, I had a lot more flexibility formatting my BOM's than I do with SWX. When I posted a note about how to format the BOM's the way I wanted, I got some workarounds, but nothing as simple as how I used to be able to do them in NX. I understand that this is not a high end package, but it should still work better than it does.

                      • Re: Feel like a plebeian
                        Ryan McVay

                        Al Griego I remember the V10 days-1993-96 (not to be confused with NX10)..boy those were some challenging year with the beginnings of parametrics of UG..I remember something about a sketch setting that would lock up your parts (V10.1ish). Heck I remember the days of UGII V8 and wireframe/surface modeling and then using UNISOLIDS in V9 (as I recall). Those were the days..

                         

                        I'm curious about your definition of "high end package". Is it the cost that makes a high-end package?

                          • Re: Feel like a plebeian
                            Al Griego

                            Both cost and capability. One thing I liked about UG/NX was being able to put points, or lines and arcs in models. It made routing tubing or wiring a little easier (well, to me, anyway). Freeform modeling was better in UG/NX, although the sheet metal package in SWX is pretty good. Making part configurations is pretty solid in both packages.