Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

What a boring place this has become...


What a boring place this has become...

Friday Rants on PTC/User were the Bomb-Diggity! Now, my rants will quickly be shuffled off the back corner of, never to be seen again.

My rant today is: Why does SolidWorks get special mention on McMaster-Carr part files? I know why......I am just ranting!

Have a good weekend fellow Creo-tians


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.

Uhmm my guess might be posting at such an hour may inhibit others from seeing it until the dreaded "Monday"?

I don't know, just throwin it out there.... and if you're like me on Monday... well....enough said.

I have a love/hate relationship with McMaster.

Their screw models are just god awful!

It's Monday.  Enough said.

Yeah...agreed....but it will get banished this morning first thing. thd.jpg

On a positive note...I have the same L/H relationship with MMC too....screws especially as you said.

Yes, Monday.....onward to slay the Design Dragons.

I do understand about SW.  It is the low end denominator.

My complaint is... if you're gonna put some effort into providing a model, do it reasonably right!

Like the thing about the screws, the drives (philips/hex) are actually pretty nice but making copied offset slanted disks for threads?  Come on!

I'd have three words:  YOU ARE FIRED!

I agree, doing those lame "threads" adds ZERO value, and actually increases regen time and adds unusable complexity.  I told my users to never use them, and instead made a pretty extensive CORRECT library (with max and min threaded length per the specs even).  If they absolutely needed something from there, I would get it, delete all the garbage, and rebuild it.  On the other hand, connector manufacturers seem to get it.  If they don't have an actual Pro/E file, at least usually the STEP files were accurate, most even showing pin1.  PEM seems to have good, accurate STEP files too.

Probably because Solidworks is a better system and more and more people are using it because it doesn't have such a steep learning curve as Creo.

a.jpgb.jpgThe SW missle has been launched!

When you have been using Pro/E for over 20 years, SW has a pretty steep UN-learning curve!

I still (after nearly a year) miss my middle button, and my query select and my fully-defined sketches, and my fully-defined assemblies, and my assembly constraints that make sense because they are in some kind of order, and my software that doesn't randomly stop working 3 times a day...

Initially, I had high hopes of finally getting a drawing package that was more pleasurable to use than sticking wasps up your nose, but no - it's every bit as awful as the Pro/E drawing package.

Shiny icons, though.


LOL  In the short time I was comparing 2014 to a 5 yr-old outdated version of Pro/E I found a TON of stuff Solidquirks simply cannot do.  Things I was able to do in less than 1/2 hour and 4 features were impossible in SW.  Those that COULD sort of be done in SW, took a ton more features and were far more fragile.  I have a thread on here about it, in fact, where I went on the SW forums looking for challenges for I could do them in Pro/E.

Guess the kids are persuaded by fancy icons and shiny graphics vs. true modeling power...... 


Learning curve is a non-issue for anyone that's going to use the software (any software) day in and day out... it's just a sales tactic.


True dat, Matt!