Skip to main content
A
agaribay1-Visitor
1-Visitor
July 18, 2014
Question

General discussion: CREO

  • July 18, 2014
  • 10 replies
  • 4433 views
I've been using Pro/E since version 17 and really have enjoyed using the program but as of the creation of CREO....not really impressed with the interface.

Your thoughts?

-Art


[cid:image001.png@01CFA0E4.5DF2E1E0]

This message (including any attachments) contains

confidential and/or proprietary information intended

only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure,

copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this

information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation

of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the

sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the

message from your system. If you have any questions about this

e-mail please notify the sender immediately.

    10 replies

    B
    BrianKrieger10-Marble
    10-Marble
    July 18, 2014
    I'm one who readily drinks the cool aid (Kool aid?!). I like the new UI. The ribbon appeals to me (I love Office 2010 and even 2013), larger icons for popular functions, ability to customize ribbon, better JLink environment settings, more rmb menus and model tree access, etc. I also have to say that the command search is a definite home run. I appreciate the learning connector videos. I know we can customize that as well. I have also enjoyed the changes to sketcher, too. There are some pretty major setbacks, though. Measure tool and integrated windchill performance are both abysmal. It did take a bit to get used to where the datums are, but that can be mitigated by putting the on/off buttons directly. So not saying everything that changed is tulips and roses or even well thought out.

    Overall, though, I like the updated UI. I even like that they've changed the background to white. Of course, it will be a different color in CP4 probably (ha!).

    Granted, I only started on 14 so I'm not a lifer.

    BK
    J
    JamesKasson1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 18, 2014
    I'm with Brian on this, and I'll add that the many changes that have been made to the sheetmetal UI have been nearly all significant improvements. In many cases there may be more mouse-clicks needed, but the greatly improved flexibility in the process is welcomed by me anyways. (I've been using it since 2002.)

    Regards,
    James
    R
    RonGrabau1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 18, 2014
    Art,

    My thoughts on this is like recommending a restaurant. I may think that the restaurant is the best on earth and then next person will hate it. It has a lot to do with your style and preferences.

    Some people love to bang on the keys. It helps them be productive.
    Others like icons and other such things
    I have seen tablets used quite efficiently
    Some people love their IPhone and others Love their Androids.

    Anyway, I have used PTC tools since version 6. I would never go back. I too like the new interface. It took me a while to convert. Could some things be changed for the better, YES but I would not like to go back. I use to have 100's of mapkeys to help push things along. I remember the old contests on how many menus you had to push down to get to a function. ( I think that the winner was about 17 menus down) I also remember the old sketcher days. We spent almost a day on sketcher and how to get your sketch to regenerate. Now I never worry about that (do you remember all the hate mail over this one?)

    Lots of people will disagree with me but overall I think that PTC is going in the right direction. If you don't like it, find someplace else to eat.

    Ron Grabau
    D
    dgschaefer21-Topaz II
    21-Topaz II
    July 18, 2014
    Although the old menu manager still pops up occasionally, this is the most consistent UI Proe has had since my early days on rev 16 or 17. I'm a fan.

    --
    M
    mlocascio1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 18, 2014
    I have some troubles with where they placed commonly used features. But, as
    you know, PTC NEVER asks any of its users what they think about
    Ch-Ch-Changes. Every time they make a UI change we have to adapt.



    Michael P. Locascio


    J
    JohnDugan1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 19, 2014

    Indeed, there have been some major adjustments I've had to make between starting on Ver. 11/Unix and now at Creo 2.0.W7/64 and some were indeed painful; but overall as a long time Windows user I really like the movement to the new UI.


    Even though the need to customize processes (e.g. Mapkeys) is less I find it is more easily done when I want to. Modifying the existing icons in the ribbons is way easier than it ever was to edit the UI layout in earlier versions. The ease of moving items to the QuickAccess Toolbar is truly welcomed.


    I also agree with comments made on the improved sketcher. It is much more intuitive, controlable and flexible.


    As a person who learned CAD while working in a precision sheetmetal job shop I REALLY like the improvements to the sheetmetal module.


    Are there some things I don't like, sure, bur even though there is still much to improve, I wouldn't want to go back. Change is hard, but growth is rewarding.

    D
    DeanLong1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 23, 2014

    My $.02


    All in all Creo is a "better" evolution on many fronts. Being a "lifer" (Rev6 Vet) I have seen much from PTC over the years.It's safe to say it was free market competition from SolidWorksthat forced PTC to take a hard look at the GUI and functionality that resulted in Creo. There are some things that were overshoots in my opinion. The Creo colors are abysmal and terrible for old guy's eyes. My retinas have been in front of a CAD screen for 30 years and are wearing out. I know I can change them...but I get so busy thatI have not had atime to set it all up to a more "benign" interface. (If any old fellow geezers have created a pallet they would like to share, I am accepting charity)


    Cannot stand the pre-highlighting at times, especially when trying to change dim values in a model.


    I likeSimulate Lite (Thanks SW for the forced functionality). BUT....200 surfaces max? C'mon you stingy rats. Allow us the full hot order with Lite. It's already limited on many fronts so what sense does it make to limit the suface count?


    Reps are still too cumbersome for me....better but still a bit of drudgery.


    BOMS and tables...still too esoteric and cumbersome.


    Setting colors and surface textures went the wrong direction. WF4 was nice....I hear Creo3 has some goodies. I have yet to do actual work with shadows, rendering and background "On" so it's functionality I do not find useful.


    Mr. Doug Shaeffer will jump on me for this...but Configs are too confusing for me. The "Current Config" thing is something I believe is overkill. Keep in mind I am a Simple CAD Monkey and do not have Admin requirements. It may be nice for them but gets in my way.


    The sketcher setup assumptions are a hidden danger for Parent Child relationships. I Always, Always, Always make a point to verify my sketcher setup is the way I want it and not what Mr. Creo thinks I want. 9.9 out of 10 times it chooses a random surface as the orthographic reference I do not want. That is fundamentallyopposite to good Pro/E modeling robustness.


    End $.02

    D
    dgschaefer21-Topaz II
    21-Topaz II
    July 23, 2014
    I feel somewhat obligated to reply, LOL.

    Frankly, I absolutely agree with you on the "current config" in Creo and what you are saying about how configs work in Creo. You and I may disagree on the value of the config file system (Invaluable is the word I'd use), but how PTC has attempted to simplify it while maintaining its use is a failure.

    "Current config" is a decent idea - show the user what the current software configuration is - except that "current config" doesn't actually exist, it's simply the sum of the config files loaded and whatever changes the user has made. Those changes, however, if not saved to a config file, are lost when the software is restarted and the UI does nothing to educate the user that this is how things work. It's difficult, in the interface, to understand the robust system behind Creo configurations and how to use it.

    Other software, like SW, make it easy on the user to change the setup, but give no insight as to where those things are stored. This makes it impossible (or at least very difficult) to share that configuration across the organization or even to a new workstation.

    The Creo UI tries to be easy like SW but keep the power of the config files in the background. The end result, however, is harder for everyone.

    --
    D
    DeanLong1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    July 23, 2014

    I wondered if you would! LOL I promise to spell your name correctly from now on Mr. Doug SCHAEFER


    I am with you on both the invaluableaspects of config and the failure to launch on some of the new stuff. For example, when I first loaded Creo2, I set my colors to a scheme I liked that didn't burn a hole thru the back of my head and saved it to what I thought was

    "Current config" is a decent idea - show the user what the current software configuration is - except that "current config" doesn't actually exist, it's simply the sum of the config files loaded and whatever changes the user has made. Those changes, however, if not saved to a config file, are lost when the software is restarted and the UI does nothing to educate the user that this is how things work. It's difficult, in the interface, to understand the robust system behind Creo configurations and how to use it.

    Other software, like SW, make it easy on the user to change the setup, but give no insight as to where those things are stored. This makes it impossible (or at least very difficult) to share that configuration across the organization or even to a new workstation.

    The Creo UI tries to be easy like SW but keep the power of the config files in the background. The end result, however, is harder for everyone.

    --

    D
    dgschaefer21-Topaz II
    21-Topaz II
    July 23, 2014
    Great example of a UI that appears to do something, but doesn't do the whole job and gives you no clue as to what you're missing.

    (You need to set the config option "system_colors_file" to point to the file you saved.)

    --
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement