don´t have much complaints, but some;
1 - Activate a part in assembly. When I activate a component, I have always to do "locate in tree" to find it, this should be automatic.
2 - Sections. In big assemblies, when you zoom to a detail and want do drag the arrow, she isn´t there. You have to zoom out to be able to drag it, losing the focus. When a section is activated, a arrow should always be present to drag the section
3 - Zoom to selection. When selecting a small surface or a edge, changing the view, sometimes is hard to locate it. A zoom to selection would be a a very welcome function.
4 - Colors. A option in config to transfer colors from models to models would be great. I have a lot of components in libraries with quilts for cutouts. Every time I make a solidify, I have to paint surfaces one by one, to identify clearances and fit´s. Transferring the colors from the surfaces of the quilt, would be just a one time work. This would be a very good improvement.
5 - Colors. Some colors options exist in config.pro but to work I have to add some transparency to them. Every time I regenerate, the colors loses it´s transparencies again.
6 - Bom. Creating Bom´s in drawing´s works, no doubt about that. But a BOM in a Excel like app is much more pleasant and intuitive to work. Just watch the competition, and make something similar. After more than 30 years something's have to be changed.
7 - Measure tool. The measure tool has really, some annoying things:
Let´s take a measure,hum, from from this edge, (4 clicks to achieve it) to this surface ( more 4 clicks)... nothing? I forgot the control..., let´s try again... Ok done, where is the measurement? I can´t find it, oh it´s behind the main measurement tool, I have to move it first... Finally.
First, I would suggest a filter in the RMB or in the dialog box(Surfaces, edges, Points,Planes) to avoid mouse travels.
Second, the measurement shouldn´t never appear behind the main dialog box, this seems a bug.
Third, The use of control key is really necessary?
8 - Family tables. Family tables are great, Everyday I use them more and more. One option that I miss is to create a drawing to every instance. I think this could be easily automated. Another option that requires too many clics is the "replace by family member", it´s behind a menu, and a sub-sub-menu. Cant we have a icon for that?
"2 - Sections. In big assemblies, when you zoom to a detail and want do drag the arrow, she isn´t there. You have to zoom out to be able to drag it, losing the focus. When a section is activated, a arrow should always be present to drag the section"
this should be raised as an SPR i thnk ....it is very annoying actually....
1 - Creo 3 Print Preview. 10 steps backwards and adds way too much instability
2 - Creo 3 - Creating Dims. After all the flak PTC got for the terrible measure tool... why would they do the same for one of the most common basic functions such as creating dims.
3 - BOM - Please nuke this and start over from scratch. Hasnt changed since Pro/e 2000i2. Working with BOM is like pulling teeth. Need a fast way to create a working BOM without having to spend an hour using filters on every assembly drawing to get things to show up the way we want ( with some real sub assemblies and some for modeling purposes. Have the option to click on item, creates a table row and a balloon. That is how it should be done. Other guys can do it?
4 - Hole creation - Why must we spend hours creating hol table to half get us to show hole a standard hole callout should look.
5 - Fasteners - The other guy kills Creo with out of the box tools and better interface for working with screws and bolts.
6 - Color schemes. Playing with text and font colors for hours to get a setup that is usable with a dark background should not be required. Can we get a dimension color bg fill for dimension in model space? Example: white text on white part. Not gonna find it there!
7 - The ribbon customization config. This needs to be WAY easier to figure out how to save and work with a config. We still have engineers that have given up on this.
8 - When Creo does crash ( and it does often ), the so called recovery can't load anything is a search.pro was used. Oh and by the way, yes we are on fully certified boxes, video cards and certified drivers before the geeks comment back.
9 - Measure tool.
10 - After years of setting up configs and mapkeys to print right, I cannot get any of it to work with the print preview. Keeps crashing and getting stuck in a preview mode without the menu with the exit button.
First ten for me and I'm just getting warmed up......
Can someone buy me a new mouse? I just smashed mine out of frustration again.
The list of annoying things is already so long that i did not have time to read it completely.
One thing is problably not yet in the list:
The removal of the 'Simple Sweep' command has dramatic consequences on the
calculation time of large (hole cut) patterns when You use 'Var Sec Sweep' instead.
The reason is that the 'Var Sec Sweep' cut result in a Group and a group pattern
cannot be made 'variable' or 'identical'. The calculation for a large hole pattern can be easily
a FACTOR 20 longer.
This is the reason why we simply CANNOT upgrade to Creo 3 and must stay on Wildfire 4.
you can create OLD features in Legacy mode. This mode can be activated by typing Legacy in Search command field (magnifying glass icon, top right corner of Creo window).
Martin, Indeed with the Legacy search, You can get access to the sweep cut command but the problem is that in creating the sketched trajectory, on a datum plane (on the fly) through a datum point (on the fly) is NOT possible
because the Datum feature creation commands in the ribbon are 'grayed out'.
What is more, it's ridiculous to go back to the very old style Pro/E commands because the Ribbon is not well designed.
I have also found that after creating a hole table and doing any modifications to the table, as soon as I create a text note on the drawing, the table updates to it's original state .
It is true that PTC doesn't do everything correctly, but I think that's partly due to requests/demands, but the single biggest problem in business is the ridiculous hurry up and get it done requirement, as though superiors have any idea what it actually takes to get the job done correctly. If we didn't have the military chain of command thing to deal with and had management that didn't just make demands, but actually managed properly most of our products and software would be far better.
The issue I have with all of the complaints is that you really do have to work with what the software does, and stop thinking it should do something else. Stop fighting it and utilize it, they often know what's best, rather than some user with rather limited knowledge/ability who thinks it should do something else. I think a big part of the problem is that management is making demands of their software guys that probably aren't really what should be done. Marketing is responding to the people who think it should be like solidworks. Solidworks isn't very good, but it lets you use sloppy techniques and still create features where Pro-E says hell no.
Daniel you talk abot slopy techniques, however in sheet metal you can model things that overlap when unfolded and Pro-E lets you get away with it. I will always remember a Solid Edge induction day, where I brought in a sample from Pro-E to see if it would load it up and Solid Edge instantly flaged up the problems. Solid Edge does not let you do silly things like that.
Solid Edge has actually killed off Pro-E and got PTC running like a headless chicken to catch up with the superior non history dependent modelling system. The syncronous tech is a ground breaking game changer. That is why it is market leader....It is designed by actual engineers ,for engineers and not by software programmers with what they think is a great idea at the time.
Solid Edge is a throw-away product that Seimens bought. It hasn't killed anything and isn't a market leader. It was originally developed by Intergraph, which was eventually bought by UGS, which was bought by Seimens. Seimens own flagship NX, itself formerly a UGS product, is a competitor to Solid Edge.
This is what "Synchronous Technology" means to a user - more complexity.
"Because synchronous technology only re-computes faces that are affected by an edit, I may not have to fully constrain a model."
Yes many packages have a history of different ownership. You can trace back solid edge and Solid works to the same Kernel.
Siemens did buy it from Unigraphics with big problems and took it off the market for a few years to develop and introduce the syncronous tech to it, long before Creo was ever launched. Creo is PTC's response to it, introducing syncronous tech only recently.
NX is the flagship but Solid Edge is at a different price point in the market place.
You cannot deny the power of this system.
History vs non history example here:
Ha ha, like all demos, this is of course very coloured. All examples shown are very much in favour of the free modelling approach. Note that all the free modelling changes do not interfere with any other features. What if a pocket depth changes to the extent that it crosses another feature? What if you don't want to rotate that plane around a real edge, but rather a virtual edge?
They are right about one thing though: sometimes you want design intent in your model, and sometimes you want it switched off. Being able to do that is very powerful.
As a former local PTC manager told me a dozen or so years ago: Pro/Engineer's history-based parametric CAD is not the best method, but it does ensure that your model is fully constrained and that the behaviour is predictable. Free modelling CAD is much nicer to design with, but the unconstrained-ness can lead to some very unexpected behaviour.
I officially deny the "power" of this system.
That's like... my "official" denial. I may be a bit punchy from too many meetings lately but... seriously? Why is this even a thread?
mmm. This morning we had a model in sheet metalwork like a wedge of cheese. We wanted to put a 10 degrees angle to both sides and keep the base the same. The base is a void, ie no metal, we wanted to add the 10 degrees from the non bend side, so the base remains a rectangle. Let me see if there is a tool for that....er not found one. This in the end involved a total rebuild of the part. Remade in solid to get the start shape, used convert to sheet metal, it still remains a solid, not very powerful there. Rebuilt the whole model.. no other option.
Now if that was Solid Edge all I would have to do is to drag steering wheel to the fixed base side, apply the 10 degrees, hit mirror option, job done, in minutes. In Creo a whole morning wasted. Pehaps you have a solution to this constant need to rebuild models, when in other packages it is a tweek here and there, Brian.
You also ask why this thread? Cannot you see, it is a way of defining why Creo comes short in so many areas, and if PTC even bother to come here, it is a starting point for them to research how other people have tackled the many issues Creo has. It is a way of being subjective and putting the problems in context.
that is with synchronous modelling right?
i will tell you one think for sure.....if you do it right in pro/e....there will be very few issues....
perhaps that's why everyone..else copied the parametric mode of modelling....
and now suddenly its not worth it right?.....
name a software..which does not use the parametric approach....it started with PTC....then everyone followed...
Rohit, I believe PTC have answered your question, with the introduction of Creo Direct.
Parametric, thus is considered old hat, even by the inventors of the mode of modeling.
Yes Siemens bought out the Unigraphics package, took it off the market, then introduced it as Solid Edge with the non history based synchronous modeling, that even PTC have conceded to.
I disagree, while it lends itself pretty well to working with non-parametric geometry it's also been promoted as a means to satisfy late design changes, especially for those with limited capabilities. Personally I'm not real sold on it as the best way to go for having a good model database to work with or from. If all you care about is getting the model changed, and really don't know any better, then it's probably okay. I've always felt that there's a lot of value in having models that can be reused, especially when designs are similar or follow design standards. If you have a complex model with a lot of features, and then someone did a lot of cheap and easy modifications using direct modeling, that model probably won't be very reusable. Of course, "reusable" can mean somewhat different things to different people. For me, reusable in this context is something that can be torn apart to a some extent and made into something without going thru the entire design process again, while retaining much of the design intent or design standards, and preferably also have most of drawing as well. Quite a bit of time, and as we all know, time is money, can be saved by doing so. This is something that is lost on a lot of people, especially those who never learned a CAD system, as well as those who may be somewhat "functional" with a CAD program, but don't really have the capability to successfully make real changes without losing much or most of the model while doing so, and there's a lot of these people out there.
Unigraphics is now called Siemens NX, using a Parasolid kernel. Solid Edge used to be owned by Intergraph and uses an ACID kernel. What makes you think Unigraphics was turned into Solid Edge?
Just to clarify, Unigraphics is Siemens high end cad system and Solid Edge is their mid-range cad system. Solid Edge did not replace Unigraphics.
Creo Elements/Direct, formally know as CoCreate, does not use a parametric approach. It has been around since the early 90's and is a fully functional CAD software using a direct modeling method. In 2008 PTC bought CoCreate because it saw a need for direct functionality in Parametric. That is where the commands in the flexible modeling tab have come from and Creo Direct is being developed to have all/most of the functionally of Creo Elements/Direct.
Recently my company has updated the file server and most of the problems I had with Creo have gone. I believe it was a timeout issue that was causing my unstable program running.
Creo issues or Windchill issues? We upgraded our i-net lines, and Windchill, while it still s#cks, at least doesn't crash as much. So, I think we had the issue you might have seen. I will say we never had that issue with Intralink because that software wasn't stupid enough to run things over the least stable system in the world - the internet....
the best software in direct modelling is Spaceclaim..now part of ansys.
Spaceclaim founders have also worked at PTC....
Solidworks founders have also been at PTC
Spaceclaim is a nice toy, has some very nice features (especially if you do FEA), and it definately has potential... but it is still years away from being a full CAD modeller.