I design automotive automation equipment and I like Solidworks. I don't care much about surfacing, for what I need it works wonderful. For the price and what it can do I think it's a wonderful program. Yes, there are programs that can do more surfacing stuff. So what? If you need that, buy other software!! It is called SOLIDworks, you know! I am eternally thankful that I don't have to work with autocad anymore!!
Ok, if that were all the world needed was just solids, that would be fine. and if that is all SW wants to offer, then fine. BUT that is not the case, SW is offering. Solidworks IS offering surfacing. And you dont just give something that is 1/2 assed and not as good as other products that can offer the same thing for 1/4 the cost.
My beef, when it comes to surfacing is that, surfacing has been around for years. I stress YEARS. Alias and Rhino alone have at least 10 years under their belts of doing just that. There is NO reason why, by now, NURB surfacing could not have been included in the program. Yes it is a solidmodeler. But solid tools alone cannot and do not rule the world. Maybe in your world that is all you need. But for me, I would like to stay as much in the same program as possible.
Imagine if I said to you, "hey you can build 3D model but when it comes to technical drawings, you have to go back to ACAD"? Just because you dont see why something is needed does not mean that it is not something that can be useful.
somtimes i start with a solid then i turn it into a surface and back to a solid. other times i start with surfaces and turn it into a solid as the final step. i find these kinds of design methods are better then just working with solids. you should look into surfaces they are there for a reson. i also think solidworks is a awsome product. ill put all my eggs in there basket.
who are you addressing this thred too?
Arthur have you looked a Shapeworks?
In time I bet SW will incorporate shapeworks into SW... somehow.
I just started getting into Surfaces in the last year and I haven't seen a problem using the surfaces to get what I was after. Don't get me wrong I have fought it sometimes but I always got what I wanted. My hardest project for surfaces was the mask I did for that Bionicle.
Regards, Scott
Scott, yeah I tried shapeworks. I loved it. I have been trying to get the company I work for to purchase it but hey red tape galore. Plus they dont see the reason for it when I get 99% of everything done that they send my way. I just tell it, it would make my life a whole lot easier.
Well, Mart, since your solids are made of surfaces... you actually have always used surfaces.
That is, you are and always have been a surfacing user. And, SW did ship it's first release with some basic surface features.
Makes you want to go..... hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, doesn't it?
Anyhow, the issue has been about adding surfacing tools or editing surfaces or nurbs as well as curve/spline tools (which are the foundation for the surfaces and the foundation for solids). SW Corp knows by now what is needed and SW is actually behind the curve for adding these tools. Unfortunately the users will have to wait until the competition begins making SW look bad and have more examples they can rip-off and more users start asking for these tools. (btw, imho, the majority of you prismatic users are the ones slowing down this process.)
I agree most users do not use surfacing tools but I will wage that when most users experience the advantages they can offer to their design or feature content, it's only a matter of time. Then,... years later,... you'll say, how could they have not included these tools? Sad thing is, I know most of you 9-5's would not know the diff and don't give a rats.
Otherwise, regardless, because SW has not had enough competition and the majority of their users are prismatic users, the release of the tools has been very slow. Ah, but when sales weaken... and sales/marketing twits get challenged more,... they will have to push it. It's already happening, finally. It's always a good sign when prismatic users complain about surfacing.
We surfacing users have to thank the competition demons for what they can offer... which of course will later be marketed as user requested features = BS!
....the next release, sp and annual subscription games continue...
..
Mart wrote:
Sounds like making your life easier isn't very high on your manager's priorities. (Why am I not surprised?) Tell him you can get your work done faster. Take a couple of designs you struggled with and estimate how much time you would have saved. Estimate how much time you would save in the next year.
Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems
Different strokes for different folks. I don't have to do fancy drawings, but I don't get upset when other folks in the group complain righteously about how poor SW does compared to AutoCAD or any other software. Try not to take it personally when I complain that SW surfaces are a pain in the ass.
Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems
I don't know about ShapeWorks but if you mean the proper surfacing routines finding their way into SolidWorks then "somehow" equals one or more of the following taking place :
"ShapeManager gives our customers the power they need to create higher quality designs," said Robert Kross, vice president of the Manufacturing Solutions Division at Autodesk. "With each release of the Autodesk Inventor Series we increase functionality of the ShapeManager kernel to boost performance, robustness, and overall quality so our users reap more advanced benefits from our software. Because of the rich development of our ShapeManager kernel, competitive products that rely upon generic modeling technology are now at a disadvantage."
"The goal of developing a dedicated 3D modeling kernel was to incorporate it in Autodesk design software, particularly Autodesk Inventor, to allow users to design more complex parts and modify more complex virtual models than they could with the generic ACIS kernel, and to provide increasing application stability and performance, all of which require sophisticated mathematical computations to define and communicate three-dimensional design intent. Autodesk continues to support a dedicated development team with substantial experience in solid modeling to develop ShapeManager for the Autodesk Inventor software application and fine-tune it for the demands of
3D users in the manufacturing marketplace."Without any of the above happening I see no / very little progress becuase SolidWorks Corp. is clearly unwilling to spend the need R&D money.
When SolidWorks does have the needed surfacing this would allow something like a Camaro Z/28 to be modeled so that it is manufacturable / looks real rather than looking like a toy model. When this happens it would be nice if SolidWorks included some of the reverse engineering tools that are included with VX's Vision (no extra charge) as this would also help in producing the above. :>)
jon
Well stated.
jon
"I design automotive automation equipment and I like Solidworks. I don't care much about surfacing, for what I need it works wonderful."
Ever wanted to design something that had smooth flowing lines ? Would it not be nice to have the tools to be easily able to do this ? What if your next job required this ? Do you want to be forced to learn a new tool just because SolidWorks Corp. was remiss on giving users the proper tools ?
"For the price and what it can do I think it's a wonderful program."
Unless your doing large assemblies, basic solid modelers are going to sell for 1,000 to 1,500.
"Yes, there are programs that can do more surfacing stuff. So what? If you need that, buy other software!!"
SolidWorks is now promoted and sold as an Industrial Design tool. Why should SolidWorks not do what an Industrial Designer needs it to do ? Why should they have to "buy other software" because SolidWorks does not have the needed tools ?
"I am eternally thankful that I don't have to work with autocad anymore!!"
If SolidWorks Corp. does not broaden and expand their limited market you will have less choices in the future. The program will die and you might just end up back on AutoCAD.
You view of SolidWorks and the world seems to be very limited. Consider taking a broader approach rather than your extremely narrow view.
jon
You don't use surfaces or solids yourself, jb. Why not?
Jon, your regurgitating all that Adesk marketing ether without some comment on how far it is from reality is cause to question your credibility. I'm rather confident that Autodesk's ShapeManager is not going to be a market driving force in the near future where advanced surfacing functions are concerned. It certainly is not now. So far, for the most part, the only differences I've seen between ShapeManager and ACIS 7(?) is replacing references to "ACIS" with "ASM" in the "Failed to...." feature creation error messages. So, thus far it appears to be another effort to distract the current and potential users from the disappointments of a less than stellar implementation of the ACIS kernel with a change of name and some adroit use of smoke and mirrors.
=========================
Jeff,
"Jon, your regurgitating all that Adesk marketing ether without some comment on how far it is from reality is cause to question your credibility."
The following is taken from my previous post:
"3. Autodesk delivering on the promises just announced for Shape Manager and actually implementing them in Inventor... not just talking about them."
You stated:
"I'm rather confident that Autodesk's ShapeManager is not going to be a market driving force in the near future where advanced surfacing functions are concerned."
Frankly, Jeff I don't see where Autodesk has much of a choice. If they fail to make a major impact to distinguish Inventor, then very soon Autodesk will lose market share that they will never be able to be recovered / will be insanely difficult and expensive to recover.
The window for software vendors who have been delivering half baked / half assed incomplete solid only modeling products is closing. Unfortunately it has not closed by now. By next year the scene is going to be radically different. Much more so than anytime in the last 5 years as powerful hybrid surface modeling finally arrives in more mid-priced formerly solid only products. My money says Autodesk's Inventor will be there.
SolidWorks should have been there at least 3 years ago.
jon
The nice thing about Jon Banquer's messages, I know I can ignore them without missing anything. I didn't even read this one. I doubt I missed anything.
"At no point in your rambling, did you even come close to an intelligent thought. I award you no points, may God have mercy on your soul."
___________________ Todd Bennett Celerity Group, Inc snipped-for-privacy@celerity.net
No, it's just copied from what someone else wrote somewhere. You don't use it Or ANY 3D system.
You again don't even have a clue..
[ Don't own one. Can't afford it. I spend *ALL* my money on machinist tools. ]
Not that he seems to know what they are ....
See jb at the bank:
Hi! I just discovered on the Internet that you claim Spatial will change the kernel in SolidWorks to Acis - as a result of the lawsuit between Spatial and Autodesk.
Would someone else like to explain this? Thanks
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.