Whats better SolidWorks 200x or Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire 1.0

What's better SolidWorks 200x or Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire 1.0?
What's Solidworks like for stability i.e. does it crash the same as
Wildfire 1.0? How does it handle error reporting, software updates, does it do backward file compatability and autosaving. What about large assemblies and PDM?
Any comments good or bad would be greatly appreciated.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wildfire 2.0

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depends on what you need a 3D Parametric Solid Modeler for. A conservative estimate would be that SW does 80% of what Pro/E does, for less than 80% of the costs. If you are doing really complicated surfaces, I'd sat Pro/E, otherwise, I'd go with SW.

Wildfire 1.0? I don't know how much Wildfire crashes, but SW2005 for me is mostly stable. My gut feeling is it is the most stable first realease of a major upgrade they have ever done.

file compatability and autosaving. If you just buy SW (or Pro/e), I think you would be crazy to not get a Subscription service. It gives you tech support and all the software updates. Tech support is handled through the reseller you buy it from, so research that. Ask other SW users in the area who they use and if they have issues with them. SW will open older SW files (and a bunch of "neutral" files as well) and convert them to the current version. With that said, you can not go backwards. I do not think any 3D modeler can save an older version.

SW handles large assemblies fairly well. Of course, a large computer would be a very good idea. SW can handle 3gb of RAM if you do some tweaking. More RAM, more video power, and more processor...seemingly in that order. As for PDM, there are many options. SW has their own, and there are thrid parties that do it too. If you are looking at SW, it might be wise to make sure that whoever your looking at for PDM is a certified SW partner. Partners can be Gold or Silver

Pro/E is a great product, and for that, you will pay for it. Not as much as you used to, but it is still exspensive when compared to the middle-tier products like SW that are out there. Of the middle-tier, I would say that SW is still the leader for the best all around product. Others do something better, others are a bit cheaper (beware of the "buy our 2D product, get the 3D one "free" folks). If you really do high-end complicated stuff, I'd lean towards Pro/E. If you go simple to hard stuff, you couldn't go wrong with SW.
Mr. Pickles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mr. Pickles wrote:

That's not true. If you need to do any manufacturing, e.g. CNC programming, Solidworks does exactly 0% of what Pro/E does.

In other words, Solidworks has a long history (since it's initial release, actually) of being unstable.
HTH
--
Black Dragon /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign
\ / against HTML mail and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Black Dragon....
I think you have to look at the overall big picture. Pound for pound, to get the same level of functionality in Pro/E that you get in SW, it cost 3 times as much. If you are saying that SW doesnt do CNC and that is your only break against it, then wouldnt that bring it to 99%. (I jest, but I think you get the point)
To each his/her own.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wildfire 1.0 has a very bad reputation for being unstable, I don't think PTC are recommending that their customers move to this release of the software.
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 12:10:42 -0500 (EST), Black Dragon

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<proeuser> wrote in message> Wildfire 1.0 has a very bad reputation for being unstable, I don't

Now that they have WF 2.0, it would be pretty hard to imagine them telling people to stick with 1.0. I'm quite sure that they pushed very hard to get people to convert to 1.0 when that was all they had. I'll bet they never said a word about instability.
I was amused when they announced proudly that over half of their customer base had switched to WF after one year. I thought that was a less than ringing endorsement from their customers. Of course, we never did switch to SW03, jumping to SW04, so I guess I can't give SW a particularly good endorsement either.
Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Large firms (with lots of seats) rarely switch mission-critical software to new releases early on. Recall that their customers & vendors also use software too.
Parts can go upwards (migrate) in release level, rarely backwards. So almost everyone else has to migrate first.
Also, consider the cost & risk if there's a major bug ..... they, unlike the small (# of seats) user base, have to assure that their risk is very, very small.
HTH
--
Cliff


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mr. Pickles wrote:

I've seen certain VARS offer WF2.0 Foundation Advantage for less than SW05. The only major thing SW has that is lacking in WF are the basic mold tools, the new weldment tools, and sheet metal. Though Pro/E comes with a free basic parts library and you have to upgrade to SW Office to get Toolbox. You can add many more tools to WF at *significant* cost. I'd say if you're doing simple molds or simple sheet metal SW would be the definite choice.

I've seen the exact opposite. I would never choose SW to do a large project. Certainly large is a relative term but in my experience as long as you have less than say ~1500 parts including all your fasteners and so on SW will *limp* by. Pro/E has many tools for dealing with large assemblies (skeletons, zones, shrink wraps, simplified reps, etc.) and SW has almost none.

A faster computer benefits Pro/E as well. On certain platforms Pro/E can use a 64-bit memory space (typically limited to something lower than 64-bits by the memory controller/CPU and/or the amount of RAM physically installed).
One thing I've noticed with SW is that it is a resource hog. A huge resource hog. It is easily 10 times slower than Pro/E on the same hardware. SW file sizes are huge, and for no apparent reason. A simple part with a handful of basic feature is rarely smaller than 500K. The same part modeled in Pro/E is on the order of 10K. SW is the Microsoft Office of CAD programs, bloated.
Pro/E user's have been complaining of bloat for a long time and they typically stop complaining after they've used SW. One thing I like with Pro/E is that it's very easy to work off a network because of the very small file size.
> As for

Pro/Es PDM is very good, very well integrated, it's just expensive. It's a little easier to get by without PDM on Pro/E though because of automatic file versioning/revision.

My impression is that SW and Pro/E have been at the same price for a while. I've recently seen WF2.0 Foundation Advantage for $3200 including first year maintenance (maybe it's a holiday deal?). I've seen SW05 for $3995 + $1200 maintenance.
Where you really start paying with Pro/E is to add mold tools, advanced assembly, cable/pipe routing, behavioral modeling, advanced surfacing, PDM, FEA, etc.
But many of these functions aren't even available in SW yet. Pro/E is definitely more flexible but if your needs are not met by the basic package things quickly get expensive.

I'd agree.
I've been using SW almost exclusively for the past two years and I've come to like it very much. It would be my first choice for basic projects. I've done a lot of injection molded part design and it's generally a pleasure to use.
One of the worst things you have to deal with when you go with Pro/E is PTC.
That said Pro/E is still the choice if you have serious complicated work to do (short of the real big boy stuff like designing a car or a plane).
Regards,
--
#include <disclaimer.h>
Christopher Miller
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Can you explain what you mean by the below statement.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
proeuser wrote:

Ummm, it means PTC sucks.
Regards,
--
#include <disclaimer.h>
Christopher Miller
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
PTC tech support is a joke, unless you enjoy playing phone tag to India. My local Solidworks VAR is usually able to resolve problems much quicker.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

PTC.
I almost hate to admit it, but the PTC sales people are getting better. (Not that they could have gotten any worse.) We've been looking at Pro/E, NX3 and Catia. The Pro/E people haven't been overly aggressive and haven't been pushing our manager or her boss. On the other hand, they also haven't shown how Pro/E can work well compared to SolidWorks on our sample parts, whereas the NX3 and Catia people have.
Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
proeuser wrote in wrote:

I think what he means to say is that PTC sales people have a certain reputation for being, well, unpleasant. Not that they have the corner on that market.
matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just a few facts....
You dont have to buy office to get tool box, you can get seperately as an add in. Bang for the buck, office gives you about $2500 worth of add ins for an extra $1k.
SW does have quite a bit when it comes to customizing for large assemblies. I have not tried Pro/E, but from what I have seen, 6500 piece assembly file, running with no problem in Solidworks. What you have to look at is the type of geometry vs just the # of parts.
It really is 6 in one hand and half a donzen in the other when it comes to these CAD programs. It is more about personal choice than anything else.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I would also suggest looking at other options as well such as Solid Edge. Solid Edge is produced by UGS whom also owns UG NX, Parasolid, and D-Cubed.
Ken Mr. Pickles wrote:

conservative
80% of

Pro/E,
stable.
upgrade
backward
a
from, so

they have

"neutral"
said, you

would
tweaking. More

As for

parties
sure that

can be

much as

middle-tier
that SW

something
get the

I'd lean

with
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Perhaps he should look at UG as well .... and, if considering SW & SE, AutoCad <G>.
--
Cliff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

WildFire 3.0 (is coming....)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Can you explain why you think Wildfire 3.0 will make a difference to any of the below items?
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:11:38 +0100, "Jerry.J"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<proeuser> wrote in message > Can you explain why you think Wildfire 3.0 will make a difference to

I have read it will have got many interesting improvements.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.