Fusion 360 vs Onshape

[ricky.huff]

Hey Y'all,

I am the unofficial Fusion 360 evangelist within my organization, taking every opportunity to sing the software's praises.  I had a chance to sit down with a key decision maker within our mechanical engineering organization to discuss the future of CAD.  Leaving the meeting he tasked me with putting together a list of the "Top 5" features he should should check out that set Fusion 360 apart from Onshape (and other CAD packages to a lesser degree).  So I pose that question to you.  What differentiates Fusion from the rest of the pack.  I have my ideas but wanted to hear from the community.  

Thanks in advance.

P.S. I understand that what matters to me as an individual and to my engineering organization will not necessarily be what matters to you.  Nevertheless, I want to hear what you find awesome and why.

and...

I know that Fusion 360 and Onshape have been discussed in the forums.  The content I found was from 2016 which feels like light years when it comes to the development of both of these products.

Thanks!

[daniel_lyall]

Can ever do all of what your company needs that's realy the question that matters and the cost $$$$.

[Lonnie.Cady]

thing I like better about Fusion is that it is a complete package from one company.  CAD/CAM/FEA/Render etc... all in one package and common UI.  You can't hardly tell one environment from the next in consistency.  There are some differences but I expect over time the UI will gain even more consistency.  Fusion has a strong tspline/sculpt and patch toolset that Onshape does not.  Fusion also has a very active community.  Many, many videos and tutorials.  While the training may seem a little scattered and not too organized there is no shortage of it.

Onshape IMO seems more geared toward mechanical assemblies. 

They have automatic fasteners, Standard hole sizes, Configurations, Good drawing toolset. The UI is great IMO.  I actually like the idea of no installs and they don't really have any files to manage. The parts live in the browser.  There is no "onshape" file.  you can export a dumb solid though.  I think from a security stand point that is a great idea.  

I personally chose fusion for the CAM.  Onshape does not have a native cam and likely never will.  I don't like the idea of a cam system on the desktop and cad in the cloud.  I know that VisualMill has a cloud versoin in beta.  I doubt the UI will be consistent with Onshape.

It is tough to point out strengths between the 2 since what tools are valuable as strengths will vary based on a company's needs.

[cekuhnen]

@ricky.huff

This depends really more based on what you need to do?

Both programs have advantages over each other.

However few points speak for Fusion

1. All tools are available in one application (CAD CAM RENDER SCULPT)

OnShape is browser based and for CAM SCULPT you need to use external apps that often are only windows

2. Solid Surface and Sculpt work on the timeline

OnShape offers no parametric Sculpt (Sub-D 2 BREP)

3. Cost - Fusion is very affordable

4. No internet no OnShape - Fusion you can locally store files

5. Actually the modeling tools in Fusion are broader and better.

OnShape added some features Fusion does not have but from my experience they don't even work well

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@ricky.huffwrote:

1. I understand that what matters to me as an individual and to my engineering organization will not necessarily be what matters to you. 

 2. Nevertheless, I want to hear what you find awesome and why.

---

1. Does you company have an internet website?  If not, can you describe your products?

2. Autodesk Inventor Professional.  Full-featured set of design tools, including Design Accelerators and 2D documentation tools. iFeatures, iParts, iAssembly, iLogic

[ricky.huff]

Lonnie,

Thanks for the solid compare and contrast of the two packages.

You touched on a few great points.  I agree the all up CAD/CAM/Simulation/... is great in F360.  That is one thing that really annoys me about Onshape in that they say they have all of these extra plugins but in reality it is just linking to 3rd party software that comes with it's own cost, interface, and learning...certainly not cohesive.  What bugs me about it the most is it reminds me of high school when I busted my back on a group project only for others to get credit for it.  It feels like Onshape takes credit for other people's work. 

One place where I disagree is in Onshape's file management.  What happens if Onshape were to fold (startups can do that from time to time), where do all of my files go?    Interesting how perspectives can be so different. 

Again, great reply.

Thanks!

[cekuhnen]

@ricky.huff

Well regarding files you an always export and back up step versions.

You understood the 3rd party extensions for OnShape pretty well - it is a mess in many cases.

Fusion here provides one UI and a better data flow and data interaction.

[ricky.huff]

Claas, thanks for the excellent reply.

I really think bullet 4 can be a total deal breaker, especially if you are having to manufacture product in locations where the internet is spotty or throttled by your local authorities.  I know I work on the bus quite a bit, I don't want to rely on my internet connection to keep me afloat.

I would love to hear more about bullet 5, what tools set Fusion 360 apart?

Thanks again!

[ricky.huff]

@cekuhnen

I think exporting STEP files may work for an individual in isolated circumstances but....

• Having to manage backed-up STEP files across an organization sounds like a nightmare and almost totally negates the cloud storage aspect
• From my experience STEP files lose a ton of the parametric details, timeline, etc. making updates in the future much more difficult and in many cases requiring a total redo. 

I think your third point is spot on and will definitely make my Top 5.

Thanks again for jumping into my question.  I really appreciate your replies.

[cekuhnen]

@ricky.huff

Yeah STEP export bakes everything - thats true.

But the likelihood of OnShape to suddenly shut down - I am not so sure about - hard to predict.

[Lonnie.Cady]

@ricky.huff

I understand what you are saying about Onshape not having files and 'what if they close up".   Anything is possible.  However it would be no different if Fusion closed up.  Your desktop install would stop working since it is required to connect to server every so often and exported .3fd files would not be able to be opened any where and retain their parametric history.  You would be forced to export them as dumb solids also.

Definitely not trying to say one is better than the other as I chose Fusion between the 2 strictly because of my need for CAM.  But the issue you describe is more of a license issue between subscription and perpetual IMO.

[ricky.huff]

@Lonnie.Cady

Thanks for the reply.

I think you make a great point.  It has encouraged me to rethink my statement and certainly soften my position. 

I think there is some uneasiness in not having files stored locally.  It may just be a false sense of insecurity. 

Regardless, I wouldn't base my decision on this point as it is speculative and very 'doomsday' in nature.  I don't make decisions on the 0.001% chance in life, why do it here.