Anyone familiar with Unigraphics in here? Is it similar to Solidworks?
- Vote on answer
- posted
16 years ago
Anyone familiar with Unigraphics in here? Is it similar to Solidworks?
Anyone familiar with Unigraphics in here? Is it similar to Solidworks?
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.
Yes. What specifically do you want to know?
--Scott
I just got a call from them too, they are really pushing their product right now.
Do you think good SolidWorks users can transision well to UG?
SW lets you play. Pro/E lets you play doctor. UG lets you play God.
And catia v5 lets you.....? :)
play well with others
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 *
A god with poor perception of parallel and perpendicular. Such errors are common and inherent to CATIA.
"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
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..
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.
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
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.