Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Jim Peyto » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00



What is this *with the ACAD interface!!!!

I chose Solidworks specifically because Autodesk products are repulsive
both on a practical and a conceptual level.

Layers, Blocks for symbols, COMMAND LINE INTERFACE!!!! What the hell
??!! Are we gonna have to futz with pen mapping & paper space in the
next version?

This is definitely a step in the WRONG direction. ACAD folks will learn
SWX quickly without meeting them half-way. It will have to happen,
because those who aren't into production solids are being eaten up by
folks who are. Just be patient.

So Solidworks, if you're listening, please don't spork up an otherwise
beautiful (if buggy) design environment. I can live with SWX crashing
2-3 times a day, and the video card (that you guys reccommended) puking
& forcing a shutdown every 10 minutes. But I can't live with a
compromised design environment. I'll go to SolidEdge in a heartbeat if
things are gonna go in this direction.

What's everybody else think? (Serious users only, not mgmt types or
"application engineers", etc.)

Daily rant supplied by:
Jim

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Sporkma » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


  Like Dave Murray said in a post in a different thread, the command line
interface is optional.  Doesn't get in MY way.  Why NOT provide AutoCAD
users an easier way to make the transition to something that doesn't reek?
I'm with you on your opinions of AutoDesk and their products, but I see no
reason to spank SolidWorks for trying to be helpful (and for trying to gain
converts from AutoCAD/MDT, which can only be a merciful change for those
poor souls who're still trapped with it).  So far what I've seen with 99 is
pretty positive, although like many others I'm hoping they'll migrate
toward a hybrid modeling environment eventually.

> What is this *with the ACAD interface!!!! . . . (clip) . . .


 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by bosser.. » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


I am in total agreement with you!

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Sporkma » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Improvement on the drafting side was too long in coming -- sure don't want to
discourage SW developers from pursuing that.  And surely there's no likelihood
of the paperspace concept rearing its *extremely* ugly head, since there's no
need for it in the SolidWorks environment.
 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by David Murra » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00



>   Like Dave Murray said in a post in a different thread, the command line
> interface is optional.  Doesn't get in MY way.  Why NOT provide AutoCAD
> users an easier way to make the transition to something that doesn't reek?
> I'm with you on your opinions of AutoDesk and their products, but I see no
> reason to spank SolidWorks for trying to be helpful (and for trying to gain
> converts from AutoCAD/MDT, which can only be a merciful change for those
> poor souls who're still trapped with it).  So far what I've seen with 99 is
> pretty positive, although like many others I'm hoping they'll migrate
> toward a hybrid modeling environment eventually.

I'll have to admit though, calling custom symbols "blocks" is pretty cheesy!

Dave

--
To send email, remove "NOSPAM" from my address.

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Soeme » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


I was disappointed with the scarcity of significant improvements
to the detailing and drawing areas of the software.  It seems that
the SW programers spent all their time on the new piping features
and the ACAD emulation; neither of which we will use!  It is even
more frustrating when I think of how long we had to wait for this
release!!!

--
Lemuel J. Bell Jr.

Posts like this one give me the impression that all is still not well in the detail drafting areas of SolidWorks, dispite rumors to the contrary.  I am assuming that only the latest software is being employed and discussed.

John Soemer

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Jay Guthri » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Yes detailing in 99 is still a disappointment.

I think what is happening is they are getting so many different type of
complaints that they don't know what to do next.  I think they have been
getting bad advice.

The AutoCAD emulation was a COMPLETE wait of resources!!!!

For me, all the text editing drives me nuts.  You have to go two menu picks
deep to do any text editing and it seems like you are doing it for
everything.  At least with our company drawing standards.

I wish they would work more on things like getting the counter bore callout
to work with slots and pockets and counterbores where the edge breaks
through the side of the part.

Things like automatic tapped hole callouts.  Having some kind of feature
counter would be great so you don't type in the qty of holes in each view.
Having automatic prefix counts for features that line up vertical or
horizontally would save me much text edits.

They still need to work on the auto alignment feature with ord dim.  It bugs
me how the bend leaders do not stay parallel with each other when you jog.
It makes it hard to understand the print on parts with lots of features. And
the last time I checked (pre-release) you can't rejog when you change text
size.

I could go on and on.

I know if I could take one of their programmers and have them detail some of
my parts, and do it with the time constrains given to me, the solutions to
the detailing shortcomings would become abundantly clear real fast.

Even with these weakness, I still think SW is great and would not go back
for nothing.

Jay

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Jeff Moell » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Sporkman,

By your reply, I'm assuming that you're talking about going from AutoCAD
detailing to SolidWorks detailing, and that you're also saying that going from
the one to the other is going from one that "reeks" to one that doesn't. Well,
let me say, from one who works with both (I've worked with others as well, CV,
ProE), HAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA! You nearly caused me to laugh to
the point of convulsions.

NONE of them reeks as bad as SolidWorks when it comes to detailing, BY ORDERS
OF MAGNITUDE! Case closed.

Jeff



>  Like Dave Murray said in a post in a different thread, the command line
>interface is optional.  Doesn't get in MY way.  Why NOT provide AutoCAD
>users an easier way to make the transition to something that doesn't reek?
>I'm with you on your opinions of AutoDesk and their products, but I see no
>reason to spank SolidWorks for trying to be helpful (and for trying to gain
>converts from AutoCAD/MDT, which can only be a merciful change for those
>poor souls who're still trapped with it).  So far what I've seen with 99 is
>pretty positive, although like many others I'm hoping they'll migrate
>toward a hybrid modeling environment eventually.


>> What is this *with the ACAD interface!!!! . . . (clip) . . .

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Jeff Moell » Wed, 11 Aug 1999 04:00:00


I'm tired of sitting back and not speaking out about a TRULY INFERIOR product.
Yes, SW modeler and assy pkgs are great. But my day is spent detailing. The SW
98+ (and all previous versions, and apparently SW99) gives your average F5
tornado competition in the degree that it SUCKS!

Jeff



Quote:

>--------------772834F8E9C9C93EE5034024
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>> Posts like this one give me the impression that all is
>> still not well in the detail drafting areas of SolidWorks,
>> dispite rumors to the contrary.  I am assuming that only
>> the latest software is being employed and discussed.

>> John Soemer

>I can assure you that things are not well in detailing in
>SW.

>Joe Dunne... your detailing sucks big time.  Detailing
>drawings in SW works me to death.

>Click click click... double click.. open dialouge box...open
>drop down...make pick.....

>And then I can't put the dims WHERE I WANT THEM...

>Why don't you guys set down and actually use your own
>software.

>What a *ass mess!

>Tony

>(and yes I own a legit copy)

>--------------772834F8E9C9C93EE5034024
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><html>

><blockquote TYPE=CITE>&nbsp;
><br>&nbsp;
><p><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>Posts like this one give me the
>impression that <b>all is still not well in the detail drafting</b> areas
>of SolidWorks, dispite rumors to the contrary.&nbsp; I am assuming that
>only the latest software is being employed and discussed.</font></font>
><p><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>John Soemer</font></font></blockquote>
>I can assure you that things are not well in detailing in SW.
><p>Joe Dunne... your detailing sucks big time.&nbsp; Detailing drawings
>in SW works me to death.
><p>Click click click... double click.. open dialouge box...open drop
> down...make
>pick.....
><p>And then I can't put the dims WHERE I WANT THEM...
><p>Why don't you guys set down and actually use your own software.
><p>What a *ass mess!
><p>Tony
><p>(and yes I own a legit copy)</html>

>--------------772834F8E9C9C93EE5034024--

 
 
 

Oooh, something smells like ACAD.

Post by Tony Sandstro » Thu, 12 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Quote:

> Posts like this one give me the impression that all is
> still not well in the detail drafting areas of SolidWorks,
> dispite rumors to the contrary.  I am assuming that only
> the latest software is being employed and discussed.

> John Soemer

I can assure you that things are not well in detailing in
SW.

Joe Dunne... your detailing sucks big time.  Detailing
drawings in SW works me to death.

Click click click... double click.. open dialouge box...open
drop down...make pick.....

And then I can't put the dims WHERE I WANT THEM...

Why don't you guys set down and actually use your own
software.

What a *ass mess!

Tony

(and yes I own a legit copy)