Skip to main content
1-Visitor
November 28, 2012
Question

Creo vs. Solidworks vs. Inventor

  • November 28, 2012
  • 45 replies
  • 150616 views

I feel like I need to vent a little, so I was hoping to get a discussion started as to why Creo has any advantage over the other popular 3D CAD modeling systems. I want to like this product, I really do, but right now, I feel like I am being forced to learn a dying system. Creo will not survive if they do not change the way things are done.

 

I am new to Creo (6 weeks), but I have used Inventor for the past 3 years. In my opinion, there is no comparison between the two. Inventor is significantly better than Creo in pretty much every single way I have been using the system.

 

Component Modeling:

Creo is completely unintuitive. For the novice trying to obtain a grasp on this program, it is next to impossible without a significant amount of training from PTC. This is probably part of their business plan because truthfully, their documentation and training programs are superior to the software itself. It seems like the designers of this software have had no personal experience using a system. The user interface is obviously a copy of what Autodesk has been doing - the Ribbon UI. However, they have failed at the ease and convenience that Inventor provides and it seems like their employees do not understand why they are programming their product in this way.

 

Right clicking for everything is a nuisance. The commands should be explicit. Once a command has been initialized, it should state what is needed to accomplish a successful feature. When I hover over some of the commands, it's as if the programmer just did not understand the point of what he/she was trying to create. For instance if you hover over swept blend, the information contained says "create a swept blend". Inventor shows a preview of what the function actually does in a quick movie if you hover over it, plus it provides a link to learn further information and even provides an exercise showing explicitly how to use the function and what must be defined for the function to work. PTC expects that you just know that you need to add certain references without actually telling you that you need it. For instance, the rotate feature needs a centerline (should be able to use any datum axis) which you then need to right click and define it as the rotational axis. If you try to do this through the message box, it will not work. There is no documentation in the help file saying this needs to be done. My anger continues to grow.

 

Also, patterning complex features is pretty much a null exercise, since it takes Creo 20 minutes to regenerate the model. I have never experienced this with Inventor. Their software updates automatically after a function is confirmed. There is no need to repaint/regenerate.

 

Assemblies:

The constraint system seems to have a mind of its own. After applying an angle constraint just this morning, and the preview showing the correct orientation, after confirming, the model just sort of reversed the direction and tilted on another axis which was untouched. I know it's difficult to picture this. But just picture me wishing that Creo was tangible and that I could soak it in Ethanol and watch it burn a slow painful death.

 

That's enough.

 

Please provide some insight as to why this program is any good at all. I need to like it. I want to like it. I have to like it. But right now, it is the bane of my existence. Some of the simplest commands that I try to initiate do not work as intended. There are way too many idiosycrasies that 'just have to be known' through experience. There is no way that someone could just hop on this program and start using it. However, with Inventor, they have actually put work and research into making their product user friendly. So much so that at my previous position, I could educate a technician in a day or two and they are off and running producing components, assemblies, and even drawings.

 

Please help me think of Creo as a helpful tool instead of a hinderence and outdated piece of garbage.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Regards,

~Bart

 

 

45 replies

1-Visitor
April 4, 2014

To me learning ProE was a horrendous experience. I learned on Wildfire 5.0 and on top of the illogical and unclear interface, there were numerous bugs that would make my computer crash very systematically. (My computer was spec'd by PTC so my hardware was not the issue). These bugs were so consistent that I actually changed the way I programmed a part knowing that if I had done it differently it would have resulted in a crash.

With the computer revolution in full swing and 90 year olds using computers, tablets, sending emails running software with ease, PTC's software seemed to be stuck in the MS-DOS era. They require the user's knowledge and experience to provide a vehicle for getting functionality out of their software, which is very rare in today's age. Entire companies and fortunes are being created out of easy to use software, CLEAN and LIGHT.

I do however have to give credit to Creo and Creo 2.0 because for me it was a step in the right direction towards a cleaner lighter and more friendly interface. The above mentioned bugs which to me are simply unacceptable were fixed and I would say about 15% of the features had more or simplified functionality.

I am looking forward to Creo 3.0 because I believe they will do more of the same in improving their software. In short I believe the so-so system is getting smarter.

I have to admit my Solidworks experience (which did not include Manufacturing as it does in Creo) was simply on a much higher level. More like the software found on an Apple iPad, CLEAN and LIGHT. Now that I know the software (3years exp) I am pretty comfortable with it, however I find myself relying on more manual ways to program a part as opposed to letting Creo figure it out for me. Lot of sketching the tool path followed by trajectory features and patterns VS. volume milling features where Creo's algorithm creates the tool path.

Patriot_1776
22-Sapphire II
April 4, 2014

You picked the absolute worst interface to start on, sadly. AND it's the buggiest release ever. WF4 was a much better, more logical interface, though I actually prefer the pre-WF interfaces. I for one don't like these new "whiz-bang" GUI's. Give me something that takes up minimal valuable screen space, and has logical drop-down menus, let me customize a high-contrast color scheme, and I'm happy.

1-Visitor
May 2, 2014

My opinion about ProE / Creo is that is not business efficient software for too many reasons.

I am familiar with Solid Works, Inventor, UG and ProE/Creo – with CAD and FEA sections.

Shortly about ProE/Creo:

The Sketcher in ProE/Creo is not good enough for complicated relations and many times cannot solve the relations.

The Solid Modeling – edit a feature is nightmare in most cases, many times there are features with references not updated or lost without indication. Not rebuilding the model features even the references exist is common thing. Creating solid features by surfaces is favor by many experienced users, but the result is frustrating for editing or analysis.

Working with PreE/Creo Models for FEA is not possible in most cases – many features are with slivers, blend on the top of other, not merged surfaces, lines, and many gaps – horrifying experience with many hours of lost time. Efficiency is about 10%. Creo Simulation often cannot mesh Creo model. Transferring to Ansys is always done on the way, the model cannot be meshed. I always go through SpaceClaim to get a working model for analysis. Assembly simulation in Creo Simulation is not common and there is no example from PTC support about this.

Help during the solid modeling or a simulation is web based and very poor. Resources for learning are only though courses. DOS based interface is the main description of Creo. Even more – other product in the hands of PTC are transferred in the same dirty bucket – MathCAD from a friendly engineering tool after major rework is going into dead end by missing common features from frustrated users.

I use Creo because this is the available tool for wasting time and energy and is CAD that follow Black Berry’s phone path of business – from a pioneer to dinosaurs. Some others CAD changed – Algors is with brand new user interface in Autodesk compare with old DOS like interface like Creo. Changing the name of product from ProE to Creo to something else will not change the core performance of this product.

1-Visitor
May 2, 2014

Christoff C, I somewhat agree with you, Creo's efficiency is not competitive, I sometimes bring my laptop to work to complete a task using my "outdated" 2012 Inventor.

"Changing the name of product from ProE to Creo to something else will not change the core performance of this product."

Here at work we laugh and scoff at the name chaning game, seems like someone is trying to sell Etch-A-Sketch under the guise of an "improved and getting better" CAD program.

Everyday I get pretty annoyed at Creo, and as you clearly pointed out, the user must enroll in classes to accomplish what can be self taught using other CAD that is simply intuitive.

Have you tried using the piping?

It's a real treat!

AutoCAD MEP does a superior job of routing many various types of tubing, piping etc...

10-Marble
May 3, 2014

Creo is really powerfull software. No question about it. But, it looks like unfinished software to me. Trying to find a way to avoid some of the bugs or even to find a fix around it hurts my efficiency. Sometimes I feel I spend 10% on design and other 90% on trying to find workarounds. This week I had so many of these situations. It is not even funny anymore. And it is not only me who's frustrated, my co-workers are also. And I am not even a newbie.

1-Visitor
May 6, 2014

the right answer is to every 3d software has own exclusively advantages over other software,you mustn't find a better job which is with respect to Mechanical Desing or product stucture design if you can't be familiar with the PROE/CREO in ShenZhen City in China

1-Visitor
May 9, 2014

After +20 years experience I can say:

Inventor is a waste of time and effort for industrial engineering, might be of some interest for design projects in non-industrial environments (f.i. inventors of projects where manufacturing processes are not involved whatsoever). The name says it all...

SolidWorks has issues for reuse of complex assemblies. The versions I worked with were not 100% parametric. SolidWorks tries to sell this as a benefit, but for me it was a problem as I expect that parametric changes on one model will also affect all children and drawings automatically.

Creo was, is and always will be 100% parametric, but as a result it has a steeper learning curve than the former two. In my experience (apart from a bug here and there) in 99.9% of the cases, if there is a problem with Creo it is related to the user rather than the application.

If used wisely, Creo can be a real moneymaker. But this "if" is a very big one...

1-Visitor
May 9, 2014

I worked 10 years with Autodesk Inventor, and then, switch job to a company that uses CREO 2.0 and Solid Works.

In this past 6 months, I used both CREO 2.0 and SW, changing from one to another because we have clients who have CREO and others SW.

From my point of view, CREO is superior to both Inventor and Solid Works to complex projects.

But, Assemblies and drawing of Inventor are better.And a very important aspect, the navigation.

Inventor's navigation is superior of both CREO and SW, and this is important part of the project routine...

1-Visitor
May 15, 2014

Everyone cheers for his team. I don’t have one. If we are looking at Creo as CAD ONLY – it is superb. But is intended eventually to be something more, and in this part is very lagging. Enjoy the CAD system until the next improvement!

For all supporters of PTC – about PTC MathCAD Prime 1, 2, 3, 4 and so – Why the old MathCAD handbooks are gone, as VBA support as well? Knovel.com does not supply them anymore? Is this an enhancement of the product or degradation of good inherited MathCAD 14 product?

This is a very obvious trend for ProE to Creo, Mathcad 15 to Prime 3.0 and what else?

1-Visitor
August 28, 2014

May I Please Have Your Attention?

I am an experienced Engineer in Aerospace, Medical and Auto having been fortunate to learn a few programs from ground up. Maybe your time should be better focused on helping to improve ALL of them! PTC, SW, Autodesk, etc.. If you loved your LAST CAD program then embrace the new and consider yourself better informed and more valuable. No time to learn? Then how can you really be an effective designer?

I feel as though we should ALL make them better. How? Something i think most have forgotten in this world. The masses will out way the few. Hmm i wonder what would happen if 500,000 Engineers all signed or endorsed a non-malicious, this is what we want or we will keep seeking till we get it system. We are the power! Imagine if PTC or SW or Autodesk were submitted a petition signed by thousands to request companies boycott them or demand they don’t pay maintenance until they fix or their software.

It can be done and it is the only way we can combat big corporations. In essence we need to strive for CAD systems to apply unilateral conformance and shared architecture so that any one system does not become a “we cannot change” due to legacy files.

I have never witnessed something in one design or software or product that I did not wish was in my own software or product. With social media especially prevalent, we have far more power of influence than you think. We just need assemble to demand the changes. We are all correct, less time learning the software in order to better the designs and manufacturing are the end goals!

1-Visitor
August 28, 2014

I just love this thread!

Software companies listen to their customers? No no no no no no! Customers must listen to the software companies! THEY know what's best! If not, then they'd be in the trenches instead of the towers. And then you'll have to get your management to listen.

This is just crazy talk!

But I'm game. Where do I sign up?

Seriously. I've got a pitchfork, some tar and a couple pillows I'd donate to the cause.

1-Visitor
September 15, 2015

I am taught that if you want to be CAD professional , you must think like a Japanese

work hard ,earn less money , obey orders till your retirement

1-Visitor
April 13, 2015

There are numerous problems with this software suite. I have an assembly with over 10,000 parts in it and what I didn't need from migration from Windchill 9 to 10 was for the light graphic reps to be set to not retrieved. I spent a week reassembling the reps and changing things throughout the hierarchy. I also noticed that the assembly wouldn't even allow light reps to be viewable after migration. So needless to say, reps are a mess.


1-Visitor
September 15, 2015

I disagree

PTC Creo has more performance than AutoC../SolidW../Catia..

I will use Creo till 2080

1-Visitor
April 25, 2016

I agree on the fact that Creo/ProE is a powerful parametric high-end system, but it’s also the most ugly CAD system in the market! In fact NX and Catia are all so powerful high-end systems, but they have a modern, clean and consistent  UI. PTC did not manage to get the ancient menu manager out of their UI in 5 releases of Wildfire! Even in the current Creo solution, there are still areas with the menu manager! When PTC launched their Creo vision everybody expected/hoped that this would be a brand new CAD systems, which combined the good things form Pro/ENGINEER (parametric modelling) and CoCreate (Direct Modelling) as promised by PTC marketing. However the fact was that Creo was just Pro/ENGINEER wearing a different suit. They just broke a big system into smaller programs called apps and did a little window dressing on the UI. That’s not a breakthrough!

 

Also if you take a closer look at the direct modeling capabilities in Creo Direct it becomes clear that it’s just simple direct editing capabilities and hiding the resulted feature tree with the direct edit features for the user. These capabilities were already available in Solid Edge V16 (back in 2005!). That’s not a breakthrough, it just smoke and mirrors. In fact Creo is still way behind of the competition (especially Siemens ST and also a  bit on AutoDesk Fusion) in the area of direct modeling. The large CoCreate base is still not able to move to Creo Direct 3.0, because of the absence of basic direct modelling capabilities which they have in their current CoCreate software (now called Creo Elements Direct).

  It seems that the same thing is happening with Creo what happened with Wildfire. R&D budget is going to different segments (like IoT) instead of finishing the hyped Creo vision. Back in the days Wildfire was launched, R&D dollars were used for the PLM Solution Windchill instead of finishing the CAD product in terms of the UI. The result was frustrated existing users because they have to learn a new and incomplete UI and frustrated new users because at the surface (in demo’s) Wildfire looked fine, but when doing more complex stuff they were confronted with the ancient menu manager UI.

1-Visitor
May 6, 2016

PTC Creo 3.0 in my opinion is as if someone dug-up a time capsule from the 1990's and said here use this.   I've been using this program for 6 months and still have yet to master the basics.  The s/w is so unintuitive to use that my productivity has dropped by 70%, monster mouse click, to do basic command like dimensioning, and the whole drawing module is horrendous.   And lets just say I live and work 2 towns over from PTC head quarters and I've yet to meet any engineer or see a company that utilized Creo   I called the reseller and asked about training and boy do they defend this product, some so brazen as calling it the best CAD s/w out there.     One time I called and asked about standard library files ( screws, nuts, bolts, PEM's, Etc).  The response "hey Creo is not SWX or Inventor, it doesn't have those, you can just download it, from a website, its not something an engineer does a lot, its not a big deal to do".