Funny, though I'm sure it wasn't meant to be. The transition from WF 4 to Creo will be painful. I lost almost all of my mapkeys which are how I improve my workflow and productivity and reduce my clicks.
Once I rewrote some of my mapkeys and got a good feel for Creo 2, I will say it's pretty good. I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Some things are significantly slower. (measure distance in a large assy stands out to me).
The tabs are not too bad. WF 5 drawing tabs were horrible, but they improved that workflow significantly with Creo.
We did the online PTC University update training. It helped but nothing will really take the initial pain out of the transition.
Steve Williams Pro/E Version 15/16 (Circa 1995/1996)
For me, I spent 4 full days (non-billable time) figuring things out , configuring Creo2, and re-building mapkeys. Then, I distributed the Configuration.ui and Config.pro files to my co-workers and it made the transition much easier for them.
However, like Steve said, "nothing will really take the initial pain out of the transition" (especially for us old guys)
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Williams, Steve C < -> wrote:
> Funny, though I'm sure it wasn't meant to be. The transition from WF 4 > to Creo will be painful. I lost almost all of my mapkeys which are how I > improve my workflow and productivity and reduce my clicks. > > > > Once I rewrote some of my mapkeys and got a good feel for Creo 2, I will > say it's pretty good. I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Some > things are significantly slower. (measure distance in a large assy stands > out to me). > > > > The tabs are not too bad. WF 5 drawing tabs were horrible, but they > improved that workflow significantly with Creo. > > > > We did the online PTC University update training. It helped but nothing > will really take the initial pain out of the transition. > > > > *
Doesn't even have anything to do with using the commands and such to what you point out.
I'm talking about things like many of our users not being able to add files to their workspace. Or revising files. Or even just editing parameters in their workspaces. Each of these gave the user the spinning progress circle and it would never complete. It took about 2 or 3 days for PTC to come up with a Microsoft security update. To be fair though they asked for several logs to analyze which were pretty large. We just installed it on many of our users computers yesterday. I can't confirm yet but I've had 2 or 3 people that have other problems now.
Then there is the initial go-live date where either in a search results table or even in the workspace it wouldn't show the File Name, Number and several other pieces of meta-data. It would only display the text "object Object". Had to clear the server side java cache AND then the user had to refresh the page. Didn't find that one for most of that first day. [cid:image002.jpg@01CF4360.182EDEC0]
Or would you like to talk about the number of digits in dimensions issues. I open some drawings and some of the dimensions go out to 12 decimal places or even to a different number of digits than what it was before in WF4. Also if I take a model that is in inch and convert it to mm the number of digits change from what it should be. Many dimensions now show 2 or more digits longer that what it was before.
The number of digits it changed to was also not consistent.
On the drawing there is some hidden detail option called "update_drawing" you can add and set to "all". This puts it back the dimensions back to the number of digits it should be. But it has to be changed on most of our drawings so far. I just found out about this option late yesterday so I haven't had much time to test it yet. Yes, I created a mapkey but I shouldn't have to run it for every drawing. We might also miss adding it. The strange thing about this is after you add it to the detail file, close it and go back it, it disappears. It's a one-time shot for each drawing.
I also just found out late yesterday that models now have their own detail file just like drawings. You have the option lead_trail_zeros there now too. File > Prepare. At the bottom is Detail or something like that. All our licenses are taken up right now so I can't look.
Then there is the issue that some of our users went to the Navigator to do a search. Typed in the criteria and there is NO SEARCH BUTTON. What??? Refresh didn't work. Close it and opening it didn't work. They couldn't even just hit the enter key on the keyboard. It would not search. The fix is really strange. I don't even remember how I came about it. Hold the Ctrl key down and zoom the page in (or out) then zoom back. (I'm sure most of you know this but for those that don't you zoom the page by using your scroll wheel mouse. Or just use the plus and minus sign on the keyboard.) Hit F5 to refresh and go into the search again. Voilà. The Search button is now there again.
I came very close on that Sunday before go-live to say let's go back to WF4 and PDMLink 10.0.
I am NOT happy.
I opened two cases with PTC. To their credit they have been VERY attentive. One case I opened I immediately went to upload a note and to add a file to the case. Half way through writing the note (and it was not that long of a note) a PTC tech called. The other call I opened the tech called within 5 or 10 minutes.
You realize that your first complaints are with WindChill not Creo 2 right? I understand that they are both PTC so they are still responsible for bugs, but please be precise, there are people out there who don't know the difference.
The number of digits issue goes back to WF 3 actually when PTC changed their ENTIRE philosophy with regards to number of decimal places carried internally vs. rounding the displayed precision. Forever in the past if I had a dimension of 1.1875 and changed the precision to 3 decimal places it would change the ACTUAL model dimension to 1.188 and if you changed back to 4 decimal places after that it would be 1.1880. Now, I didn't like that behavior, but it was consistent with the philosophy that what you showed was the ACTUAL dimension. In WF3 they added the ability to round the display off without changing the actual dimension even for model dimensions. We have changed back so that there is rounding, but that brings in a bug regarding up to 14 decimal places display if you are using dual dimensions.
Creo2 has been FAR from perfect, though M100 is supposed to fix a lot of issues and we are preparing to try it out. Overall though, I think our users are happy with the ease of use and would not want to go back.
Rob Reifsnyder Mechanical Design Engineer/ Producibility Engineer / Components Engineer / Pro/E SME / Pro/E Librarian [LM_Logo_Tag_RGB_NoR_r06]
I will only add two cents, though. And theyre my $.02, so if you dont agree, I wont resent you.
Creo2 does work and it does have a lot of good things. But there are so many infuriating things about it that I am not sure I can say it is better than WF5.
My biggest complaints to date (after only 2-3 months of part time use) are:
UI customization is awkward, cumbersome, un-intuitive and lacks the capability in order to be called efficient and productive. The default UI set-up is not efficient and REQUIRES either customization or frustration.
The default color scheme is really bad. Really bad. (so change it and stop complaining right?)
Measurement tool implementation is a failure. (cant change this)
Assembly assumptions are all wrong since when do I want two axes to be normal to each other? especially when they start out parallel!
I regularly struggle with getting assembly mode in the right frame of mind to have the RMB context menus to be what I need i.e. when I RMB on a constraint, I want to see coincident, parallel, normal, offset but many times (seems like most) I am in some other mode that shows an RMB menu with other selections (MMB, RMB, LMB, MMB, RMB now I get it ok move on Anyone else feel this???) Theres obviously some detail that I need to learn and I will with time, I hope. But I should not have to experience this level and frequency of frustration using a tool that I have been so efficiently for ~20 years! This is an example of the details in Creo2 that I am calling a step back.
OK I could go on and that was at least three cents. Thanks for reading.
Personally, if I could, I would wait for Creo3 to upgrade. WF4 and 5 were both superior in my opinion. But then, Creo 3 will probably have its own growing pains. Time will tell.
Yes, I did realize it is about PDMLink. I assumed (Maybe incorrectly. Maybe correctly) that Art is using a PDM system so I thought I would include it. If he is not then I apologize for that.
As far as the number of decimal places on a drawing issue...all I know is the values are correct when I open it in WF4 and not correct in Creo 2 without changing a thing. That's my fault for not testing every single thing in the system like that. I guess I shouldn't assume that the number of decimal places won't change between versions anymore. Silly me. I can understand a value changing because of the rounding. But to go from 2 decimal places in one version to 12 decimal places in another...wow. On some types of our drawings, because of the way the models are created, the designers sometimes create (driven) dimensions. (Please let's not have one MORE tired discussion about showing vs. creating dimensions on a drawing.)
I have several users making fun of PTC because some tasks take more clicks. I'm sure there are tasks that take less clicks.
I've enjoyed both perspectives. We implemented last year and did see some issues. Things to watch out for:
Graphics Drivers (especially ATI cards) Windchill cache (just use a new cache location) Graphics Reps (we don't use them, but apparently caused crashes in at least earlier builds) Later builds (m090+) do have lots of fixes (drawing cycling, losing tables, etc.)
Just a couple of notes on the system itself, though, I am one that dove in and have enjoyed the changes (well, with some exceptions such as the misstep on measure tool, etc.). There are some really nice pieces including the command search (oh how I wish other apps had that!), the Learning Connector (even if you don't pony up the $$$$$ for PTC U), tab customization (of course, the edits are by functionality, i.e. customizations have to occur to Part mode, Sheetmetal mode, Assembly mode, Detail mode, etc. are separate), Dynamic hatching, 3D dragger, etc.
The black eye, I think, for Creo Parametric is the interaction with PDMLink. It's astounding the issues that we (and many other companies?) see with the two flagship products not working well together. But we sigh and wish it could be better and just accept sub-optimal performance (and get beat up by our users).