I see the claims posted lately about freeing yourself from parametric solid modeling. History based, tree based, parent/child...etc..
But, I don't see those things as chains holding me back? They are tools that make solid modeling fast and easy "providing" they are done correctly. I realize that becomes a problem when working on some other persons model, especially if they are a "dumbass". And that's a very real issue, but to throw away those ultra powerful tools just to have the ability to work on models not made by you or your system is too much to lose in my opinion.
I see the constraints of the order in which things were done as a power tool. To lose that would require a totally different approach to modeling, and untill that new or different approach is shown to me I'd have to go with keep the history based stuff. The rollback bar is a machinists best friend, I'd really hate to lose that. And it's not that I need it, never had it before? But it's damn handy if the thing is modeled half ass correctly.
Not slamming solid edge or space claim, or any other different approaches to modeling, it's just that parametric modeling seems totally kickass to me, for everything...again, unless your dealing with dumb solids from imports and built shitty models. But those things can be fixed in other ways, and are being addressed in many modelers these days.
One answer to those issues is for the modeler software makers to offer more direct translators for their software into other brands and versions. But in the name of innovation, different modelers should always have some kind of problem in translation, due to the fact that they are doing things differently...and that's a good thing. It's like not wanting updates to software because of file incompatablilty? The aternative is stagnation. Better to keep moving forward tripping over compatablilty then to suffocate the industry with the "windows" effect.