hello,
Our company bought Creo Parametric with FMX and ISDX at the end of last year. I am using this package at work since last week on monday. I still feel very lucky about it 
but...
All of these guys that left messages in this thread so far are kind of right...
I might be a kid in this. I dont consider myself as experienced user. I ve been learning about Pro/E and then Creo like 8 months ahead of time before we bought the Creo licence. I struggle alot now with Creo and the real world problems I try to solve every day at work in these last two weeks.
I might add that the package we bought includes one year of maintanance.
I was told by my reseller of Creo that I should only turn at them with all of my questions and not directly to PTC. So I shot a few at them already... at first I tried a harder one which they weren't able to solve yet.
Its related to skeleton models and use of them for multiple cavity mold designs.
I figured out the solution right after the moment I hang up the phone with them. They tried to come up with something, they have actually made short tutorial videos for me, but after I dragged them deeper into that... cause at first they thought its simple... they stopped comming with any kind of reply.
After few days I kind of ended up on teaching them.
And you gotta understand me. I don't really feel confident about my skills in Creo. I could list tons of things I used to design in other software packages that I can't make with Creo yet. I have alot to learn about Creo still.
I am just saying I already know what does that mean when for example Frank say things like "the trainer, who was fresh out of college (and very sharply dressed, I might add)" and "otherwise I end up schooling him instead". These and generally speaking but clearly hit the nail on the head just about right.
*sigh*
Question: Can I still contact PTC directly with my problems? Or am I stuck with my reseller?
Bunch of things don't really make sense in Creo compared to other CAD packages. Trying to think in Pro/E way gets pretty hard sometimes.
Excellent suggestions, all, thanks! I thought this could be a very productive way to let PTC know that there seems to be a VAST, as yet untapped, knowledge base. We experienced users create geometry probably undreamed of by the developers, and it would be a shame to waste this.
@Dan: I'm really busy today, but I'll address your questions when I can.
The short answer is basically what others have voiced: That the guys PTC has available for training us, generally, are fresh out of school with zero practical knowledge, and when the topic strays from the canned demo to solving real-world customer problems, they are, frankly, incapable of helping us. Generally, we are taking training to address a specific issue, and I, honestly, expect a guy teaching me, to be at least my equal......otherwise I end up schooling him instead. 
I think PTC would be a lot better off looking for and hiring us Pro/E veterans to teach the courses, rather than kids (I can say that since I'm generally about twice their age) fresh out of college. I realize we'd be more expensive, but, far more worth it in customer satisfaction. For instance, Brian and I helped someone here with a difficult problem that none of the trainers I've ever had would have been able to solve. Think how good that would look to your customers to havd a guy who could not only teach the canned demo but actually help the customer solve the problem he came to the course to solve in the first place?
Ya get what ya pay for. So, it sounds like there's more of a market for us experts as consultants then. when do we start!
'Morning James. I think my major issues was that, for the most part, we users that were taking the training already had years of advanced Pro/E experience under our belt, and some experience with the particular module (piping, surfacing, etc.). Yet, the people that gave us the training, were, for the most part, fresh out of college with no real-world experience, and no experience outside of the canned demo. So, we'd go thru the exercises, then after class we'd try and talk to the instructor about applying this to out specific issues, and they were of no help. Yes, I know us "Olde Guys" probably would command a higher salary, but actually that might not even be the case from what I remember. I remember a guy I worked with, a fresh Engineer with almost zero real experience, who's hand I had to continually hold in even the simplest of Pro/E issues, took a job with PTC at what he told me was $80k/yr, and this was in the mid-90's. Now, I can't vouch for what his salary really was, but it gives me pause........
In a nutshell, specific training for each company based on their needs is a great idea, but it would still be better to have your trainers be seasoned, with lots of real-world experience instead of recent college grads with none. It would make your trainers far more versative, and your customers a lot more happy.
Hmm, we must have had diferent trainers. All the training I had in the Cleveland area, for various companies including NASA, were younger guys fresh from school where this was their first job. Actually, we liked the training we got from Rand better than that provided directly from PTC. The price of the class was the same or similar, but the offices at Rand were a lot nicer, we each had our own PC instead of sharing at the PTC facility, and the instructors seemed to have at least a little (though still not much) real-world experience. Of all the training I've had, I'd have to say the best by far was from Accuer here in CO. Paul DeLong is an excellent instructor, very knowledgeable, AND has even more years of seat time than I do, and had actually worked as an Engineer for many years, putting Pro/E thru it's paces in a real-world environment. Highly-recommended. I'm as happy to give credit where credit is due as I am to let loose with both barrels when that needs doing.
"My only criticism is that when I asked questions that were "off script", they could rarely answer. Every time I teach a class, some student starts tossing up those "off script" questions... and I believe it's how you handle those questions that separates the good trainers from the great ones."
Exactly. The guys I had could teach the class.....but with no real-worl experience to draw from, for "off script" problems they didn't have a clue even how to start on a solution. I'd have rather taken "your" class.
REALLY? Wow. That was Tre Stupido. Andy was VERY helpful, I had a lot of conversations with him. I should look for him there at S/W. Perhaps S/W might like to hire me part-time as a consultant?
You'd THINK PTC would rather have us high-powered guys inside the tent p!ssing out, instead of outside the tent p!ssing in......
Actually Frank, if you could refrain from relieving yourself anywhere near the tent, that might be best for all involved.
Who knows the circumstances surrounding Andy's departure. People leave companies for many reasons. Sometimes they leave on their own... and sometimes they leave because they're shown the door. The point is, we'll never know.
However, for every Andy that leaves... there's a Frank or Kevin Bradberry that join. I searched for Deighton... and he had about 350 posts in 5 years of activity. That's 70 posts a year... not too shabby. By comparison, Frank has 298 posts in less than 1 year of activity. Kevin has 249 posts in about 1 1/2 years. Other people have racked up similar activity.
So while Andy seems to have answered quite a few questions, the community has shown that it can continue to thrive even in his absence. I don't know Mr. Deighton but I'm sure we all wish him the best in his new endeavors. In the meantime, I'm confident others will rush in to fill the void created by his departure.
Best regards,
-Brian
True, but, I think I'm going to contact S/W and see if they don't want me helping them since PTC doesn't seem to be listening to me. Hey, who knows, maybe I could help S/W be good enough for me to want to permanently switch.
The tent reference is an old racing saying in reference to a certain very, ah, vocal......but very fast rider.
