PTC products are garbage.

[PTerribleCAD]

Does anyone have any advice for convincing your company to switch to a different CAD/PLM system? I've been using Creo and Windchill for about a year. These are by far the worst, most appallingly outdated products I've ever seen.

[StephenW]

You'll likely get better answers from the solidworks or inventor or xxx community for a question like this.

[Patriot_1776]

Right???🤣

[BenLoosli]

Did you get trained in how to use Creo and Windchill?

What are your issues with Creo and Windchill? The user community may be able to provide some guidance if you state your issues.

[PTerribleCAD]

Too many issues to document. PTC is stuck 20 years in the past. My question revolves around getting my company to eliminate PTC products, so if anyone is having or has had success with that, I'd love to hear about it.

[tbraxton]

I have been involved with this exercise. In my case it was to demonstrate that Pro/E if adopted would cut our product development duration and costs. We adopted Pro/E as the MCAD tool after the two-year trials were completed. We were not cost constrained, and we evaluated all high-end 3D MCAD systems available at the time.

Run a pilot program using the alternative SW tools on an actual project and use metrics that are tracked to quantify CTF indicators ($, time. etc.). Make sure each team using all of these tools has been trained and has some level of proficiency using them and is motivated to be involved in the trials.

You also need to consider bringing in experts in Creo Parametric if they are not in house to objectively evaluate if it could be an effective tool. If your Windchill deployment was not well executed that can make working with Creo Parametric quite painful, so consider if it is the PDM tool that is deficient and not the MCAD tool. I see this often; organization pays for Windchill but does deploy it effectively and it is a net negative productivity impact.

[BenLoosli]

The company I used to work for used Unigraphics for 18+ years, until a PTC sales rep played a pickup game of basketball at an apartment complex with a junior member of corporate IT. The company was about 50/50 with UG and ProE, but we were the only division forced to change to ProE. 4 years later, the company decided to sell the whole division and the new parent mandated a switch to CATIA.

I know Caterpillar used UG and ProE, until they scrapped a bunch of large casting in the machining process and tossed ProE out.

[kdirth]

When you run into an issue, search the community for the issue to see if it has been addressed in the past.  If not, post a new question and we will try our best to provide a solution for your issue.

[Patriot_1776]

Well, much as I'm NOT happy with PTC's systemic lack of empathy or even consideration for their customers, and their decided lack of ANY effort in fixing the many BUGS that have cropped up in Creo over the years (essentially giving us the double-barreled middle finger), I'm still a strong Pro/PONENT (sorry, Olde timer Pro/E joke,🤣...) of the basic Creo, though a LOT less so about WindBURN (which I find to be an overly-complicated, user UNfriendly PITA, this mornings major issue just another example, but I digress...).  Why am I a Pro/PONENT?  Easy, I've USED other software like SolidQuirks (back in the early '00's and currently) and was an expert in NX 8.5 5 years ago for almost a year at an Aerospace company until I got back on my preferred Creo, and I prefer Creo to both, ESPECIALLY to SolidQuirks.  Which is NOT as capable as Creo.  No "trajpar" or graph functionality in S/Q.  NX was very powerful, and there was a lot there I DID like (better datum curve creation and surfacing, and better for large assemblies but the interface sucked and the dwg functionality was absolutely horrendous), but there isn't anything I like in S/Q better except that it DOES have a better "fixer" for imported STEP (and IGES etc.) models.  In fact, we bought copies of S/Q just to ONLY use for this function.

So, if you're looking for people here to support and assist your attempt to ask (Beg?) your company to move to a lower-capability software, I don't think you're going to find it.  In YOUR case (though not your company's), you would be better off going to the cartoon-like interface of S/Q at another company.

🤣

[alouw]

I've been working on the software since about wildfire 2, and I've been in a supportive roll for the last 10 and a half years.

And I 've even managed some multi CAD environment design offices.

It is my experience that when you show people what is under the bonnet with PTC products they tend to start seeing things differently.

However generally people don't like being forced to do something they don't like, and its my experience that people will find fault with it no matter what, If they don't feel like they had a say. 

This might be the case for you.

I've implemented so many of the competitor products that claim to be a head and when we get to the important down stream stuff things fall apart quickly. 

Specially when you start comparing to the PLM/ Windchill downstream processes.

Designers don't always get to see that side of things though.

Often the CAD capabilities can automate to a level that scares people that you show it to.(Play with the free APIs a bit)

I hope you are blessed enough to get the kind of challenges that show you what the software is capable of @PTerribleCAD. 

If you can work pass the frustration of getting used to new software and the built in bias of being used to something ells.

I promise you'll feel more positive.

[Michael]

The problem isn’t always the tool, it can be those trying to wield its power.

Creo can be hard to master. It is a very different modeling paradigm compared to implicit modeling like the others mentioned. Creo is more like writing a computer program. Each time you regenerate the model a program executes and new model is generated. This is very a powerful capability. 

Other systems don’t work this way. Everything in Creo is a variable and reference that must be chosen carefully. Just as you would in computer programming, you carefully construct robust relationships that are built with design intent. This can make it hard to use if not carefully choosing references. 

Still you raise many valid concerns that I too share. There is still outdated user interfaces and very hard to use drawing mode.

I educate customers all the time on how to leverage the power of Creo, and I’ve managed to convert a few too. Ask if your team has been using the education tools of PTC University as well as a continued education system at your company to turn complaints into “here is how to do it in Creo."

[Patriot_1776]

The problem isn't Creo the tool, it's PTerribleCAD the "tool"....🤣

[alouw]

@Patriot_1776 Play nice.😲

Its one of the most frustrating things possible changing the CAD system you are working on.

Sometimes people just need some room to vent and get it out of their system.

[Patriot_1776]

LOL  ME???  No, I just play it straight up.😎

[IbrahimTayyab]

Ngl I like your name, that's a nice touch.

[avillanueva]

You obviously have never seen SAP. Seriously, good luck. CAD can be a religion to some. Any switch has to deal with the legacy data issue and the loss of some of your folks who would rather switch jobs than switch CAD tools.  Your answer is to build a strong ROI to management that takes all these factors into account, not just that in the next year, your software costs will be lower. 

[alouw]

@avillanueva ERP (Like SAP) Is just one consideration. There is till a myriad of other systems that between ERP and PDM systems. Often designers aren't aware of, or understand how every system down stream is built on their model and its metadata. Like MRP systems, SLM systems, BOM management for different kinds of BOMs, Proper Change management etc. . . 

Once a designer starts to understand that, their whole approach to modeling changes and their Attitude. 

[BG_9869104]

r/cad is a good place for this one.

CREO may be a terrible PITA but from what I've seen others have nicer looks and feel but once you go deeper they don't stack up. 

I have often helped train people coming from other CAD systems. I usually have them show and tell me what they are used to. Usually consists of a method I would call a hack job.

They often don't care about the model construction and just want to create dimensions on drawings. All they care is the model looks right. Unstable model tree sure.  Override stuff. In general complete disregard for the model driving the show for anything downstream.

One thing for sure if the business does not use/harness much of the power of CREO modelling to drive down stream data...it's probably a waste money. Should use something cheaper and not pay for a bunch of functions that never get touched.