1-Visitor

Question

Is it me or has PTC lost it's way

Forum|Forum|13 years ago
May 10, 2012
21 replies
59154 views

Have been a user of Pro-E (now CREO, for some unknown reason) since release 2001 and although, initially the program had new developments with subsequent releases, the later versions are a joke!

The sheet metal module has not changed significantly from Wildfire 3, to produce a paper 2d drawing is such a long winded process that it makes you want to give up. With each release they change the position of the menu structure so you have to spend the next couple of months looking for commands. The mapkeys that you spent so long setting up, no longer work. It's a mess!

My discipline is sheet metal and CREO is rubbish at it. It does not even have a library of standard primitives that most CAD programs have been using since the eighties. By that, I mean 'Conical Frustum's, 'Square to Rounds', 'Pipe Branches' etc. These are from known formulas that sheet metal workers have been using for decades. These basic formulas include triangulation and radial and parallel line developments. Why should it be so difficult to develop sheet metal work from within CREO? I believe that Solid Works has this ability but we are stuck with CREO for parity with the companies we deal with.

My other major gripe is the 2D Drawing side. Surely by now, a certain amount of automation should be entering this module. If you get it to auto dimension, it does not do it intelligently but throws every dimension on to the drawing. Does anybody use auto dimensioning in CREO? The alternative is fairly long winded which is why most of our customers just throw a model at us and we are left with dimensioning and producing drawings for manufacture and inspection. The use of BOMS and tables are not very intuitive and this side of CREO has not changed from 2001 days.

All in all, a huge disappointment. After all the hype about CREO it has failed to live up to expectations. We are only a small company and only hold 4 licenses, but we have decided to drop our maintenance cover for the foreseeable future as we find it hard to justify a product that is going nowhere. Perhaps we will pick it up again when PTC finally realise that their customers are not prepared to support their 'bloatware' when they can't even fix the fundamentals.

Does anyone else out there feel as I do? If so hit them where it hurts and drop your maintenance payments until PTC listen to what their customers want.

This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

2D Drawing

G

gvora

10-Marble

WHAT PTC NEEDS, IS ADAPTIBILITY AND PRAGAMETIC APPROCH, WHICH IN MY OPINION AGAINST

PTC MANAGEMENT CULTURE.

P

PierrePatenaude

1-Visitor

I follow you on most of these issues.

I believe that PTC is run by people that don't care much about users and focusses more on ways to make more money.

For instance, training cost for PTC products are too expensive. They probably take a good part of their revenues with that. This might explain why they like scrambling around the menus with every releases, so they can sell more training and upgrades sessions. In comparision, locally, the Solidworks reseller don't charge anything for upgrade sessions (sessions where you learn the changes from one release to the other). And they give you a coffee and a donut for attending ! PTC charges for these sessions.

Another example of bad customer service, is that there a no more reseller in Canada (where I am located). We have to deal with a company based in Arizona now. So we don't have any technical support in french at all here (which is the language we speak in this part of Canada) from PTC like we used to. In comparision, Solidworks and Solid Edge both have local reseller that can provide on site technical service, when needed. And they speak the local language. PTC is cutting costs on the back of the users.

The case of sheetmetal, is a perfect example of bad user comprehension. It is obvious that the PTC people who worked on these don't have a clue about sheetmetal is.

I still like the product very much, and I don't think that I will drop my licenses like you are proposing. But I think that changes need to be made at the head of this company. I have read on the web that they want to be now more focus on PLM products then CAD products. But in any case, they need to start listening more about the users and less about the Dow Jones.

J

Johny

Author

1-Visitor

Thanks for the support Pierre. It's about time that PTC heard how it's customers really felt instead of patting themselves on the back for producing a poor product. I have to agree with you that their number one priority appears to be profit, profit and yet more profit.Much like the banking system in Europe, which is why we are in the mess were in!

J

Johny

Author

1-Visitor

I'm with you there brother. I use wildfire 4 by preference as I believe that it was the most polished version. I think that the CREO GUI was copied from the later versions of microsoft office, has that same look.

Patriot_1776

22-Sapphire II

Yep. I don't like the "lead vs. follow" mentality of WF, but it doesn't frustrate me and slow me down anything like the creo GUI does, especially in dwg mode. Sad that a lot of long-time users hate the new GUI......and it seems like they're not going to change their mind and admit they were wrong and fix it. I would have a TON of respect for any company that admitted a mistake and fixed it to make the customers happy.

The ribbon in M/S Word, Excel, etc. is also hideous. Why would you copy a BAD IDEA????

V

Vladimir_G

1-Visitor

Hello, everyone.

I highly appreciate your view points and your experience.

Personally, I prefer the graphical user interface of Creo Parametric.

For me it was relly irritating when toolbars were constantly changing their positions during the session as it was in Pro/Engineer Wilde Fire 5.0.

But that is just my opinion.

Kind regards, Vladimir.

K

KrisR

1-Visitor

John,

I come from 8 years of 3D modeling in Catia, Solidworks and Inventor. I can tell you that I surely miss some of the basic, common sense functionality (core concepts) that all three of the other programs contain.

We are a bit archaic at my current place of employment; we still do our dwgs in ACAD due to the fact that we have an ecatalog program that interfaces with the ACAD drawings. We do our dwg layouts in Creo/Pro 5. Normally, I can spend time in any prrogram and be able to figure out how to do a drawing view or add a dimension. In Creo/Pro 5 I could not. I had to be shown the fundamentals that I needed in order to do my job.

From what I hear from the old-timers is that the drawing interface, no matter what version, isn't is as robust as it could and should to be. I know that in SW, drawings were a breeze and VERY accurate. You could dim a model precisely how you wanted it to look in the drawing and it would! It was great. Catia was very robust in regards to drawings and accuracy as well. But both being from Dassault, that does not surprise me.

I can't see that PTC will be able to keep going they way they are and not end up at the bottom of the 3D modeling software distributors. I know I experience daily frustrations in Creo/Pro 5 from things that just don't make a damn bit of sense when compared to all the other modeling programs out there. Am I saying that PTC needs to follow the herd? No, but they do need to step up their game and catch up to the conventions around them.

Patriot_1776

22-Sapphire II

An aside on this, I just got off a call from a researcher retained by some Wall St. Firms about how us users felt about PTC's direction. I gave him both barrels, in my usual brutally honest way. That makes 2 in a couple months now. Maybe the investors can force some of the changes needed?

(....now, where's my rotten tomato,,,,,,?)

K

KrisR

1-Visitor

Feel free to direct them to me for opinions as well. I'd be happy to give one.........

(I threw away all the rotten ones this weekend...)

G

GrahameWard

1-Visitor

I have been using ProE since 1996. Let's face it, PTC have always been pretty high handed in the treatment of their customers. I remember in 1999 when they were No.1 and nobody could come near them. They had established a huge number of new customers in the previous year or two and their customer base was awash in investment bias. My employer at the time, a small business, tried to get a good deal on a second seat and was pretty much laughed at by PTC.

Then about six months after that high water mark, overnight, they fired all their techs in all their regional offices around the world and transferred all the technical enquiries to several call centers around the world. The techs we had in Sydney Australia went into business for themselves with their own ProE seats. PTC's profits over the previous year or two must have been enormous, yet they doubled down and cut their expenditure at a time when they could have expanded their service role. It was outrageously cynical.

So, no, I don't have much regard for them in the first place. I've always been aware that my star has been hitched to PTC for many years, and I have done well out of the arrangement. It's scored me some good jobs and got me a couple of carefree years of freelancing and teaching work. Otherwise I would have switched to Solid Works many years ago. In fact it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back if this new interface proves to be as damaging to producivity as it's looking to be.

Patriot_1776

22-Sapphire II

I agree 100%. One key thing is that they lost Andrew Deighton, a guy I highly admire. Why? Dunno yet......

J

Jacek_Mydlikows

1-Visitor

Suppose all discussed "development" blame regarding what Pro/E became until now emerge from the way PTC makes its vast part of money - very big companies.

I think this is legacy of beginnings of PTC: focusing on big fishes. As far as I know big fishes( 200+ Pro/E seats), rarely ever are happy with too often software releases, specially those ones aimed on update of interface(try to train 200+ users). Such updates would turn into lethal design flaws and tell me who is up to confirm that?

Another thing is distribution of money regarding PTC R&D budget - first as far as I remember there were plans to cut it down(I read some PTC Earnings Call Transcript), next placing Pro/E as less important product, and focus vast part of effort on PLM contract with KIA(Windchill adoption to KIA requirements). Results are visible for all of us.

For majority of us, here at this forum it is apparent that Creo did not alter CAD market balance, nevertheless of its "laud" introduction. But I would be less critical regarding Ribbon UI implementation. To me, it as significant step forward as WF 2.0 was, and I hear all that same blames as then, from Pro/E 2001 users. At the end dashboard worked fine, and same will happen with ribbon.

I am not that involved in sheetmetal so I can`t really discussed this issue. Drawing sucks, no doubts about that.

B

BrianMartin

13-Aquamarine

Well, I've had this meltdown several times over the years... the same gripes... the same conclusions... etc.

We've needed a large scale overhaul of the basic Pro/ENGINEER tool for at least 10 years. We've bolted on patches with glue and duct-tape, and re-re-reprogrammed the interface multiple times to make it look modern. We need a serious, core code rewrite. But... we're carrying so much legacy data now, the job gets really tough.

Given the circumstances, I think there's only a few ways to really affect change and make a difference. First and foremost, I think concerned users from the community need to participate in the technical committees. Second, I think we need to exercise the Ideas forum on Planet PTC. Third, I think we need to SUPPORT third party companies who attempt to fill in where PTC falls down. That means supporting third party firms who offer superior training and consulting. Free and open competition benefits all users. As companies compete to offer the best value, the quality of support and training will rise.

I think we're far, far beyond the time of grousing about the problems we're facing. We need action. We need people willing to take a leadership role. Some of the people in the technical committees have been there for years. I'm not saying these people should step down... but I am saying we need new members, new ideas, and new energy.

PTC/User used to be a wonderful organization of concerned users. It's been swallowed up. Visit the PTC User website. It's very much circa 1997.... which is probably the last time anyone really put anything into it. We either need to resurrect it... and put some resources into making it a proper place for users to confer... or we need to kill it and start something new.

It's clear that doing the same old thing has gotten us the same old results. I've joined as many Technical Committees as one person can possibly join. I could certainly use more support if anyone else wants to jump in.

Thanks!

-Brian

G

gvora

10-Marble

I would suggest that everybody here may please buy the stock/share of PTC and vote against

the stock option and salary and the salary should be linked to sales growth and company profit.

Recently this worked with CITI BANK,stock holders voted down the CEO pay raise.

Gautam Vora.

B

BrianMartin

13-Aquamarine

I don't know Gautam... this seems more like those old campaigns where people tried to get everyone NOT to buy gas on a Thursday so the price would drop on Friday. I don't think you could buy enough stock to make a difference in whether or not the CEO got a pay raise.

I'd prefer to encourage people to work within the systems we already have. I can't believe any company would purposely have an adversarial relationship with their customers over some short term profits. Sure, any company can rip you off for a little while. But eventually that kind of behavior will drive you into bankruptcy. So I can't believe anything PTC does that angers its users is intentional.

I have the they're doing what they think is right based on a number of factors. The problem, in my estimation, is that they're basing those decisions on incomplete data... or that they're focusing their energies in the wrong areas. This happens all the time in industry. For example... Coca-Cola thought they were going in the right direction with New Coke, didn't they? Of course!

By working within the system and bringing new voices to the table, I think we can make our concerns felt. I have to believe that's the best way to change things. Anything worth doing doesn't happen overnight.

A

Anonymous

Creo 1.0 is rubbish for sheet metalwork, which I use it for.. I have been using it since WF4. Basic things just do not work.

Not having an auto-save just sucks!

The latest is Regenerate and save. You have part X open, and part Y needs to regenerate on save, so you open up part Y on the family table, then it needs part X regenerated again and is suck in the loop. Unless it is fully regenerated it does not save fully.

In assemblies when editing the active part the background obscures the foreground and the dimensions also until you have the cursor in exactly the correct spot, then it re-appears again.

When creating parts the model tree does not update.

Making a copy of a family table member and not doing any editing crashes the whole family table.

Dark blue dimensions on a grey background, who thought of that needs to be sent to art school.

Axis on components randomly disappear in the middle of holes.

On assembly of components why does the Automatic setting always goto normal? It used to go to Coincident and align itself, but it does not any more.

The DXF output does not work with metalsoft.

Topology modeling system is flawed, you cannot split models up and many other things.

Recently I went to a Siemens Solid Edge day and saw a wonderful technology called Synchronous Technology that does not depend on topology. All the clutter of the brown index plains and axis are gone, not needed, you can see what you are doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnjrTE3immE&list=UUEI8mxEigB4qNHykqlAGwNg&index=31

After a day of Solid Edge Creo 1.0 seems dated and useless.

RUBBISH Creo 1.0 really is.

Today I was onto tech support and I told them a competetor's DXF works with metalsoft and Creo does not, I then said the competor is Solid edge, it is good, it works!

R

rohit_rajan

15-Moonstone

Before u start crying..learn the software properly....the base of solid edge, solidworks (parametric modelling) was and is Pro/Engineer....Pro/Engineer is a very fine and offcourse the most capable 3d cad parametric software....there are many things In Creo which even i do not like it.. but "rubbish"..is not a word for that!.

A

Anonymous

What I am saying that Creo 1.0 is not capable to do the things that I could do in WF5 elements, mainly in advanced usage of family tables and sub family tables. I have highlighted a lot of problems with the package Creo 1.0 recently to India tech support, serious enough to goto PTC development, no less!

I have had basic problems so bad with m050 that I have had to go back to m040.

I have even been told that Creo 2.0 is the bug fix to Creo 1.0 by support India.

J

JeffBerg

1-Visitor

I think I echo the sentiment of this thread. I have been with PTC prior to their procurement of Pro/E. At that time I was getting indoctrinated to their MECHANICA FEA software. When they integrated the CAD package Pro/E with their FEA package MECHANICA I thought that was GREAT. It actually was & I think the product did improve even through the WILDFIRE generations. I still have WILDFIRE 4.0 on my machine & have a CREO disk to install the new software, but yet to do so.

Some if not most of this is MARKETING. Some of us DINOSAURS wish they would simply keep the original name, but that is WISHFUL thinking. I have yet to check out the CREO package, but maybe I will have further comments in the future on this.

KEEP in mind that software is always being revised even faster than a college chemistry textbook which rarely has additonal fundamental contributions. I do think the company should grandfather longtime users on support.

T

TomD.inPDX

17-Peridot

I did learn one reason it seems so hard to get PTC to listen to our issues. It is in fact not a listening issue, it is a way-of-working issue that concerns me greatly.

In a recent customer service case, I submitted a video of an obvious bug. I am completely incensed with the back and forth between my taking the time to write a concise and complete case only to be ignored and called anyway to reproduce what the tech should be able to reproduce easily on their computer. Most of my cases have gone like this and so I finally asked why this is so damn hard to get information to the developers.

The reply was quite enlightening. Even though the tech had my video, watched it, reproduced the problem, they felt the need to contact me and make sure they had read the case correctly and also insisted on a remote connection to see my issue. I asked why they simply don't forward the video with the RSP and get the programmers to fix the problem. Logical, right?

The tech told me that they, as customer support, must write up everything including -exactly- how to reproduce the problem and a full description of the problem. The programmers are on UNIX machines and they simply cannot accept any multimedia data in their RSPs. What the...?

Myopia comes to mind here. A tale told over and over again so by the time it gets to the programmer, it is probably a completely different tale. It is my experience on several occasions that this is exactly what happens.

I can see how most people just simply give up on trying to improve the product. There are so many little dumb things in the Creo release, from context to inaccurate prompts to completely useless help that this product really has no hope of getting improved. I know on my end, I have lost days trying to resolve simply issues or having blatant bugs simply ignored due to the seemingly "small" impact. I don't ever see this product reaching a "mature" or even a "refined" state.

This is a very sad state of affairs. I'm actually looking forward to retirement so I don't have to deal with this any longer. In all this time, there really is no "great" CAD package. Probably the closest I've come to date is, surprisingly, Unigraphics NX. Those guys are a lot more on top of their releases than anyone else I've worked with to date.

R

rohit_rajan

15-Moonstone

Sir,

you are the top most participant here....please continue with that.

I have been on Pro|Engineer only for the last 6 years..and have always been impressed by there capabalities. i learned with Pro|Engineer Wildfire 2.0. Have worked for some time on Pro|E 2001...for me the best of the lot.

I don't remember when was the last time i saw soo many bugs in the software. May be b'coz of the reduce cycle time of taking out a new version plus a complete change in the user interface has resulted in that. I hope this changes with Creo Parametric 3.0.

Yes they should listen the customers..alienating them would be a big mistake....

HamsterNL

18-Opal

John Loveday wrote:
Have been a user of Pro-E (now CREO, for some unknown reason) since release 2001 and although, initially the program had new developments with subsequent releases, the later versions are a joke!

The reason PTC choose for the name CREO is quite understandable...

Just check this website: http://creo.amnh.org/