UGS

Anyone familiar with Unigraphics in here? Is it similar to Solidworks?

Reply to
thestew
Loading thread data ...

Anyone familiar with Unigraphics in here? Is it similar to Solidworks?

Reply to
thestew

I've used both. Comparing Solidworks to UG is like comparing a Chevy sedan to a Ferrari. They'll both get you there, but one's a lot faster.... and harder to drive. In other words, you get what you pay for. UG is less bug prone (but by no means perfect), and has a much larger tool set. But it will take a lot longer to learn to use well, maintenance is higher, etc.

Reply to
ed_1001

Yes. What specifically do you want to know?

--Scott

Reply to
swizzle

I just got a call from them too, they are really pushing their product right now.

Reply to
RaceBikesOrWork

Do you think good SolidWorks users can transision well to UG?

Reply to
thestew

SW lets you play. Pro/E lets you play doctor. UG lets you play God.

Reply to
That70sTick

And catia v5 lets you.....? :)

Reply to
Zander

play well with others

Reply to
That70sTick

SW lets you play. Pro/E lets you play doctor. UG lets you play God.

And catia v5 lets you.....? :)

BE GOD!!

---------------------------------------------- Posted with NewsLeecher v1.0 Final * Binary Usenet Leeching Made Easy *

formatting link

Reply to
pipsqueek

A god with poor perception of parallel and perpendicular. Such errors are common and inherent to CATIA.

Reply to
That70sTick

"thestew" skrev i en meddelelse news: snipped-for-privacy@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

"Unigraphics" from UGS is a highend system its real name is now "NX" UGS also got the "SolidEdge" product witch is more comparabel to SW

High-end CAD is NX, Catia and Pro/E Mainstream CAD is Solidworks, Inventor and SolidEdge. Close related to SW via the Parasolid kernel is IronCAD and T-flex.

Regards Peter

formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
Peter

I used UG for 3 years after being on Swx for 5 years. I hate nearly every moment of it. UG letting you play God is a joke. Its a pain to use and just as buggy. It has some neat features that Solidworks doesn't have but Solidworks has stuff it doesn't have. Overall I guess it depends on what you do. If a program has a function you need that others don't have, then the other program will always be more painful to use. So it depends on if UG has something Swx doesn't that you need. If not, then I can't see the justifying the higher cost.

If you go the UG route....there are no configurations, sketch relations aren't as robust, assy mating sux, handling file references is bad. On the other hand, UGs equation function is excellent and it will allow you to dimension stuff in drawings that Swx won't if the geometry is complex..

Reply to
Jason

No I dont. We have both starting with SW in 98. Recently added UG NX4 and absolutly hate NX. Takes 3-4x longer to do things and if people thought drafting in SW was bad, IMHO NX is horrible. It would probably be faster to export the models and detail it in Autocad. SW does things out of the box with drawings that you have be GOD to get NX to do. We use a block for adding material, qty & detail number to each detail and SW does it automatically, with NX you have to do it manually.

Reply to
j

Well, Macro's don't exist since NX2, replaced with journals. GRIP has been on life support since about V13 of UG. Only 'enhancement' since then is the when the plotter routines changed to SDI. UGS hasn't broken GRIP, yet, but they aren't enhancing it, either.

Ben

Reply to
Ben Loosli

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.