MY standard non "PC " comment to these people after a while is if you hate IV and love SW so much why don't you just get a SW job. Then we both will be happy, so far only a couple have taken my advices the years. Like some bad wine with you're lousy cheese?
I have this discusion at work regularly (large consultancy so see a lot of contractors doing the rounds).
For some reason the SW people seam to think that if they dont know how to do it then obviously its not possible.
The only thing ive found that can be done in SW and not Inventor is flat pattern a flight (screw or say base plate for a bin overflow)
Like celticstar said...even after you show them...
I usually tune out as soon as i hear "but in solidworks I can just...blah blah blah
If you know how to create a symetry assembly mate using any combination of those 6 programs I would love to hear about it - I am tired of manually updating offset distances when ever I move my components.
Blah blah blah
my symetry parts move automatically when i move components...
its just another advanced modeling technique that your gonna hafta learn...
Just like you had to learn how to use your symetry mate, I learnt how to make them follow using an Inventor method.
Thanks for pointing out that there is an advanced method to match Sw core fuctionality. But I wont bother trying to figure it out because I am guessing that your advanced method wont allow you to drag the source part around and have the mirrored part follow dynamically with perfect symetry in real time like Sw core functionality can. This is what I need during concept layout and my VAR said its not possible. If you can achieve that then you are one heck of a programmer and could probably make a lot of money selling an add in.
I dont hate inv, I just have two eyes open to the possibility that other programs can be better in some areas.
Im intreaged...what on earth are you designing that would require you to drag and drop around a mirror plane to calculate optimal layout location.
I dont hate SW its a tool ... so is Inv ... they do the same thing. (I have both eyes wide open)
Your workflow may make one easier to use than the other, for yourself only. That DOES NOT make it a better program, it makes it better for you and your specific skill set.
I would not expect an Inventor drafter to use solidworks, I would not expect an sw user to use Inventor.
If your leading hand in the workshop knew how to use the drill press, he wouldnt say the new drill press isnt as good as the old one because the stop button on the new one is called a halt button.
Its not better, its just a flippin drill press.
Same for the Inv/SW argument...They are both parametric solid modeling packages...get over the 'better' program story....they are both great mechanical packages...as long as the user is adequatley trained...and yes the learning curve is VERY similar for both programs.
Boats, where just about everything is symetrical about the centre line. When creating a concept I miss being able to drag seats, cabins, engines, pumps etc and have both sides of the boat update. I also waste a lot of time adding mates that Sw added automatically.
Yes both drill presses will drill a hole, but the one with more functionality might drill 100 holes faster than the one with less, and that in general makes it a better machine. This is why workshops regularly upgrade their drill presses. A manual lathe and a cnc lathe both turn, but the cnc is faster. If we only cared about parametric abilites then we could just use Alibre instead, but we dont because Inv has more features and capabilities, just as Sw has slightly more than Inv. So I have to disagree with your drill press analogy.
Take for example project cut edges in a sketch. Sw allows you to select only the faces you want to cut. Inv cuts everything that is visble, so in Inv you have to toggle visibility on and off to control it, in sw you dont. They both do the same thing but Sw does it faster and easier. But when it comes to using project cut edges top down across parts in an assembly, sw remains parametric, inv doesnt. So 99.9% parametric modeller in my view. (yes I now there is a workaround but it takes longer, is more complex and less reliable)
Project cut edges is not boat specific and I could list a lot more.
I have used both for an equal amount of time and am just calling it as I see it. I find I need to create more work planes/points and use more features to get the same job done.
I STILL FIND my bigest problem at compinies is the lack of training. They think that at most you need just a basic training class and or no training if you know another system. One of biggest problems is reps and level of detail understanding how they work to create assy's and parts lists. Software each year adds more capability and complexity. Training is needed to increase productivity to understand how to best use (do) the new functionality, not just stumbling thru it till it works. Seen at way too many companies to know this is not a major problem, and we are a small part of the problem, by allowing it and not pushing our managers. Companies that use contractors are most definitly the worst, (particultly mill contracts). Contracts will cover equipment updates and software but not training, Talk about stupidity on the side of the company.Other major problem is that they have not updated their procesess to match the CAD software, so that they work together. End of my rant.
I never meant this thread to become a "which is better" thread. Lord knows we've seen way too many of them here already over the years.
I look at it this way, depending on your workflows and what you are doing and how you like to do it, use the program that suites you better. I'm sorry but I do not subscribe to the claims one is better than the other across the board. As anyone with an honest mind here can admit, for every command you claim SW can do better, someone will claim Inventor can do someother command better than SW. And that's a fact as far as I'm concerned. I can list numerous commands that I've needed and used at previous clients that SW just couldn't do or couldn't do as well as Inv....and they had SW on site. Just as I'm sure there are numerous commands SW can do that Inventor can't. Again, that's NOT the issue of this thread.
This thread is about the general attitudes I've run into time and time again with SW users....this "hollier than tho" type attitude. The "SW can do everything and butter my **** toast each morning as well" attitude. I don't and haven't seen such attitudes from Inventor users trying to learn other softwares.
I've been to SW World a few years back (the same previous client mentioned above, I had to maintain both SW & Inv) and witnessed this attitude first hand. Yet when I go to AU, the people there will listen and actually welcome comments about SW and not take offense to it like the SW users do.
Case-N-point, I attended a SW2009 demo a while back (when 2009 was just released) and the demo was going over how SW can now import Inventor models. But the demo jock was showing AutoCAD files in the presentation. When he asked if there were any questions, I asked him if he could demo the process on Inventor parts as he claimed. He stammered and claimed he had just gone thru the demo. Another person pointed out he used AutoCAD files and not Inventor files. He then claimed he would, but that he didn't have any Inventor files handy. I offered a thumbdrive of some basic Inventor files to be used (note: this process was key for my client and we had to verify the claims). I got booed by the users in the room like I had just killed a puppy and before I knew it, I was being led out of the demo room. Now, before you assume things, I was totally professional and never claimed ill of SW, I just wanted to see the conversion.
That is nothing you'd ever see done at a Inventor demo.
About the best I can equate this attitude to that some of you may understand is how Pro/E people had the attitude towards CADDS5 back in the day. I could understand it then, CADDS5 was always beating Pro/E to the market with better features. The only way Pro/E was able to advance was to perform a hostile take over of CADDS5 and buy them out in order to bury it.
OK, I've gone on long enough. I'm just tired of the bs attitudes I get on almost a daily basis from SW users.
If you are hired on at a company that uses a specific tool, and you have experience on the other, guess what? They expect you to learn the tool they use. Stop fighting it and trying to get the company to switch over to YOUR preferred CAD program. Start your own company and do that. If you don't want to learn and use a differnt CAD program, then don't accept the **** job. I've used both programs and I prefer Inventor hands down, I do not apply for SW jobs, why the hell would I if I don't want to use it? But I digress.
You are so right on the training aspect. Here they allow me one hour, yes, one hour to "train" new employees (with or without Inventor/Vault experience). In that hour I have to cover how they use Inventor and Vault along with the entire file Lifecycles and Categories, company standards, etc. It's no where near enough, especially if the new employee has a question or two (gee imagine that). But then again, if the new employee is an ex-SW user, their questions tend to be "SW does it like this, why doesn't Inventor?"
They refuse to allow user to charge time to training sessions so I have to do them as "brown bag lunch" sessions where I will be lucky to get 10 people out of 120 to show up. Instead they insist I write up a desk instruction to cover "every" possible issue a user can come across.
Training is key!
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register
Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.