IDEAS - Has it actually been retired ? 2

[Climbmiller]

Hi,

I've been contracting at a company who use IDEAS alongside an early version of Teamcenter. They're reasonably happy with what they get out of IDEAS as the designs are fairly simple but their VAR is pushing them to go to NX. Whilst nobody can doubt this would give them a much better platform to design future products they just can't suffer the inevitable downtime whilst they ramp up their skillset on the new system. So, for now, they are content to soldier on with IDEAS to avoid impacting critical projects. However the slimy sales guy is putting the proverbial wind up the design manager threatening removal of support on IDEAS.

What is the actual status of IDEAS support from a UGS standpoint ? Is anyone else still using IDEAS and getting similar messages from UGS or the associated VAR ?

Any input from the forum appreciated.

 

[MCGNX]

Ideas is not going away anytime soon. Why? Ford Motor Company is still using it for one.

However, it's worth noting that the updates to i-deas are fairly insignificant at this point as most of the effort is focused on the TCII aspect and things that make the CMM tool work better. All in a push to get folks to move to NX.

We have recently made this jump, and I have to say as an I-Deas user the jump to NX was not seamless and there were a few surprises.

You will gain A LOT of funtionality that I-deas just wasn't capable of, however you will lose one big aspect of I-Deas and that was the 2D drafting package. If your company uses this in the slightest, you may want to put the stall on NX at least until NX7 (which is when I'm told EVEN MORE I-deas functionality will be put in....specifically a standalone drafting)

Right now at our company we are running both....all new designs in NX and we are holding off migrating our CAD data into NX because as it stands right now NX is not a suitable replacement for I-Deas unless you don't alot of drawings.

Also, the CMM tool is still a little buggy when it comes to migrating drawings into NX so lookout there.

My advice is to do a LOT of testing first to make sure NX can accurately replace what you are currently doing in I-Deas....something we didn't do and are now regretting.

 

[JohnRBaker]

If a company using ANY Siemens PLM Software product and they get their support from a VAR and they are unsatisfied with their situation, we want to know about this ASAP. There are ways to resolve these issues, but we need to know the relevant information, such as the company name, location and the name of the VAR. Please provide this information via email it to me at:

john.r.baker@ (you should be able to figure out the rest)

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[alj722]

We are standing at the brink looking at NX after running IDEAS since it was I-DEAS 4 (CAEDS), prior to Master Series. So far I have very mixed feelings about NX. We are trying to maintain multiple CAD systems with a majority using Pro/E or SolidWorks and a small (15-20) pocket of hold-outs running IDEAS. It's been my job to figure out how big a transition it is to NX and so far it has looked very ugly. IDEAS stuff may have been integrated into the guts of NX, but the NX user interface is not fun and there seem to be big gaps in functionality. Some of our projects are thinking of staying with IDEAS until forced to bail when the computers or OS can no longer support it (We did get IDEAS NX5 to run on VISTA - although it isn't formally supported), though the talk is of bailing to Pro/E or SolidWorks instead of NX. Not because they are necessarily better, but because most of our IDEAS users have Pro/E and Solidworks experience already.

 

[acciardi]

We've been running a mixed environment (95% I-Deas, 5% NX) for about two years now, and it has been very difficult to get any kind of interop between the two systems with TcEng. We frequently have to fall back on STEP to get data from I-Deas into NX.

After seeing all the problems up close, I would pull the plug on I-Deas and just embrace NX as soon as practically possible. In reality, I think most of the parts that people have are pretty static. When you do need to make changes to existing parts, just remodel them and re-do the drafting. This also is good practice for learning the new system.

Re drafting - If your processes still require a lot of manual drafting, then I would revisit the processes. All modern CAD systems are highly model centric and do not easily facilitate manual drafting. NX does allow one to sketch in a drawing view, and there are many tools available to create view-dependant entities, but it is not going to be like stand-alone drafting.

 

[ewh]

alj722,
What functionality are you finding lacking in NX?

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[BDDrafter]

My idea of the "standalone" drafting is one that I don't like...
One advantage to NX over iDeas is the fact that the drafting package FORCES the models to be correct if you want the drawings to be correct.
In ideas you can create a 2D drawing and your model could be completely different, or better yet, no model at all.

If we continue to move forward with technology and design and build with computers, the models and assemblies need to be correct. If the possiblity of drawing in 2D or "fudging" a drawing to make it look right is there, how can you count on a model at any time?

Just my .02.
Thanks.
Branden

 

[spongebob007]

What I was told was that NX I-5 would be the last release but the software would continue to be supported for some unspecified amount of time.

Personally, I really like NX. I have veen using Pro/E, Solidworks, and ANSYS for the better part of 15 years and when I swithced to I-DEAS at my current company I thought the program was a hokey piece of crap that looked like it was stuck in 1990. I downloaded and installed NX on my machine in the beginning of this year and I haven't looked back. I found it very easy to use and powerful and I think it blows the doors off of I-DEAS. I am an analyst so I really can't speak to the differences in the drafting package. I also can't speak to the Teamcenter issues since I work locally. When I need an I-DEAS model from a designer I simply have them make me a STEP file. Works just fine for what I need.

I was able to teach myself NX and be up and running in under a week.

 

[realmagicracer]

Hello people.
I wish to share my experience about NX vs. I-deas too.
I used to work in a company using I-deas 9-12. Later I've got a job in NX-using company, and I have great experience in the both of CAD products.
I see a lot of functionality in I-deas that NX doesn't have. I'm sorry to say it but I have to say the true. Especially the drafting module was absolute nightmare.
You can get even better "standalone drafting" in Solid Edge 2D or AutoCAD.
I can give you an simple example. Once I had a drawing with a dimension that had lost asociativity. The geometry was moved 0.04 mm. Then I deleted the dimension and built it again and the number of dimension was different (+0.04 mm).
There is more, but it would take me all day to describe the weakness of I-deas drafting. The translators was weak too. The was a lot of step, iges and parasolid files that was impossible to import. And sometimes the translators died (some kind of "Orbit"-something error) and the only way to import file was using interoperate feature.
The modeling was good. There is more simplicity of design. There were more boolean operations (join, cut, add, split surface, cut-add, join-cut... etc.). The interface was good shaped (except the drafting module). You can change at any time the boolean status of any feature in history tree.
In NX4-5 there are some feature that has NX3 interface, the vision of NX is better. But the team workflow is missing. Unless you have teamcenter. But there is a way to make version control system in directory structure using file name.
And so on...

Regards: Dimo Urumov
Aircraft Engineer
Plovdiv, Bulgaria

 

[JohnRBaker]

Just for the record, the Drafting module of NX was never intended to be used as a so-called 'standalone' drafting product. It was designed primarily as a tool to document NX solid models and assemblies. However, based on customer requests, we have made some significant enhancements to 2D curve construction within the Drafting module for NX 6 and will continue to add some additional Drafting only curve creation tools, but even with those improvements, if someone came to us with a full-blown 2D standalone drafting requirement, we probably would offer them Solid Edge 2D. After all, Solid Edge is developed, marketed and supported by Siemens PLM Software, just like NX is, so in the end...

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[realmagicracer]

You are right John.
And Solid Edge 2D is FREE!!!

Regards: Dimo Urumov
Aircraft Engineer
Plovdiv, Bulgaria

 

[Brammy]

After about 10 years with I-deas - starting at the (scandal-ridden) beginning of Master Series, a new job has thrust me into the NX world. We're still on version 4 (sadly with little hope of improving that state of affairs) and are using team center. I also have significant experience with SolidWorks.

As far as NX4's user interface, I feel like I've stepped back in time and am bitterly disappointed.

When I first heard that NX would be a blend of UGS and I-deas I was very hopeful that I'd be entering a new-and-improved CAD universe. Not being too familiar with Unigraphics, I'll go out on a limb here...... it seems like the "blend" of UGS and I-deas must have been 99 44/100% UGS.

Why the HELL did they discard the WONDERFUL iccon/panel driven user interface that Master Series pioneered? Good Lord, why does NX make difficult what I-deas had made easy? And please don't get me started on the painfully limited functionality of NX drafting.... yes, guys, sometimes it would be nice to sketch some old fashioned lines and curves in good old old fashioned 2D. Is THAT so difficult to understand?

On the plus side, I will say that NX does not have the BOM recognition problems that had plagued I-deas.

So, will someone tell me? .... what happened when the UGS folks and the I-deas folks originally got together? Was there gunplay involved? Personal threats and intimidation? Financial payoffs? Clearly SOMETHING happened that caused the I-deas guys to be shoved aside and rudely discarded.

Signed.... bummed out in Oregon.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Actually, I was at that 'meeting', me and my boss, and it was in Milford (and it occurred long before any money had changed hands in the deal that eventually merged SDRC and UGS into a single entity, and part of the EDS Corp.).

While I can understand your position, there was much more to this process than many people are aware of and while I can't really discuss any of the details here, let me say that the direction the combined organization, I-deas and Unigraphics, chose to take in terms of the evolution of NX and how much would be based on UG and how much on I-deas, was mutually arrived at and it was NOT after any, what did you call it, 'gunplay' and 'personal threats and intimidation'. No, I would say that it was arrived at after a very honest, although not necessarily painless, evaluation and comparison of both products, not just from a functionality point of view, but also from an architectural and development point of view (I know because I was part of the team that ended up doing the item by item, functional scorecard which became the basis for some of those tough decisions that our new management had to make before we could move forward with NX).

And as for the 'I-deas guys', the vast majority of them (at least at the product development level) are still with our organization, playing major roles in the ongoing development of NX (and I-deas as well, albeit at a much lower level of investment) and this is at all levels, not just programmers, but also team leaders and group managers.

And while I'm sure that you may not necessarily appreciate this, NX is still a work in progress, but considering that you're currently stuck at, by your own admission, NX 4, you have NOT seen all the effort that has been expended to date.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[MCGNX]

John, well said. I've always wondered what went down at those initial meetings. Your point about NX still being a work in progress is one I've tried to emphasize here as well. I think it is very commendable of Siemens/UGS to make the changes you guys have with each new release.

Now I'm a long time I-Deas user and it's my understanding that NX5 was the first NX release with significant I-Deas features (CSYS most prominently). What I've seen of NX6 also had alot of I-Deas functionality added in...though it's not being touted as such. Things like Re-Use library are very similar to catalog parts and also the whole "cutter part"/"bushy tree" ethos of I-Deas. Also the replay feature, and out of date notifications....all from I-Deas. So it's getting there guys, and the 2D Drafting Plus is being developed as well to be a replacement for I-Deas style drafting.

As a longtime I-Deas user I can understand all the frustrations put forth in this thread. There was a lot of misinformation about the whole thing (and still is). Initially we were led to believe that UG and I-Deas would BOTH gradually change and morph until they were the same product (NX). As we know this was not the case as I-Deas has not had a significant update since the merger. There is also alot of confusion concerning I-Deas end of life, which as far as I can tell is all dependant on a few large customers who are still using I-Deas. There is also much confusion concerning CMM and the transfer of data from one system to the other, but I'm not going to get into that here.

I will say though, as a long time I-Deas user, I love NX and applaud Siemens/UGS with the developments they are making and have made. I can't stand to go back to I-Deas anymore which unfortunately I am forced to do (mainly because of 2D functionalities), and find the modeling quite cumbersome. Even with NX's 2D shortcoming I STILL think it is easier and faster to create a drawing in NX than I-Deas. The problem is when NX does something good it does it really good, when it does something bad, it does it really bad....there is no middle area, and that's what makes it frustrating.

Finally, I did a presentation at PLM2008 concerning this very subject and it goes alot more in depth as to our experiences and struggles that we are still dealing with. If any of you are PLMworld citizens and interested, it's called Life After TDM Part II

 

[Xwheelguy]

I've been a longtime UG/NX user (old enough to recall the UG did have an icon panel about 12 years ago) and I have used I-deas sparingly, but nothing for actual "work"...just trying to figure out the basics as well as attempting to complete a Nissan skills test in the past (fairly simple bracket and drawing with 4-5 views).

While I will agree that NX has a ways to go with its evolution in certain areas, I honestly don't get where I-deas users feel the Drafting is so much better than NX. Would or can anyone enlighten me on this matter with specific examples?

Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.

http://www.enkei.com

Some people are like slinkies....they don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

 

[cowski]

I would also like to know more about this Ideas 2D functionality. I moved from AutoCAD (plain AutoCAD and Mechanical Desktop - their 3D product at the time) to UG (version 15). There were some usability issues I had with UG at the time, but I can't think of anything AutoCAD did that UG could not. If I want to I can complete an entire design in 2D using UG/NX (not that I would want to - with ANY CAD software).

 

[MCGNX]

Honestly I haven't run into anything 2D wise that NX can't do that I-Deas could. The problem is that it is just so much more difficult to do in NX. This is what I was trying to say in my post. There is giant cavern between how easy the detailing & modeling tools are versus the 2D tools.

Usually it is just easier to make a sketch in model space and pull that into your drawing as an assembly component. Now you may be asking why in the hell would you do that, well you get more functions such as instance geometry and move geometry that can be used on your sketch, 'cause let's face it, Edit - Transform really blows.

(I have high hopes NX6 will resolve those 2 problems, as edit transform is replaced, and there are now sketch patterns)

Also sometimes it's easier to use the Curves and sometimes it's easier to just drop a sketch into a view. Sketches work best in my opinion, but they have their own problems such as only one sketch per view which means everything in that sketch must be on the same layer. The curves work great, that is until you want to go modify a curve you dropped in....good luck with that, as that is one of the most convoluted things I have ever seen.

I could go on, but I think the main point is that coming from the I-Deas background we are being sold this "NX can do anything I-Deas can, and better" line....and it's not entirely true. NX is FAR SUPERIOR to I-Deas in every aspect except 2, that's 2D drafting and unequal patterns/arrays. (the unequal patterns thing is easy to work around, the major annoyance there is all the BREPS you get when CMM migrating the models to NX)

 

[Xwheelguy]

What are these troublesome 2D curves being used for on a Drawing? Could you supply us with a detailed example and .prt file showing us what you're wanting to do with these curves? If you can, please be sure to include any possible downstream edits or modifications that might occur, as we do not wish to paint you into a corner with any suggestions.

Please do the same for anything Curve related (curves in drafting, sketching in drafting, modifying curves, etc.), as we might be able to shed some light on a few things. Maybe best to make this a separate file than above?

As far as Arrays, Patterns, Instancing or anything else close to those types of commands, just be patient....there is something on the horizon. I don't want to say too much, but actual NX users are assisting Siemens with this project.

Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.

http://www.enkei.com

Some people are like slinkies....they don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

 

[Brammy]

>>>by your own admission, NX 4, you have NOT seen all the effort that has been expended to date.

Absolutely true. I certainly hope that post NX 4 releases will gravitate more and more to the I-deas style user interface and lost features.

>>>>Usually it is just easier to make a sketch in model space and pull that into your drawing as an assembly component. Now you may be asking why in the hell would you do that, well you get more functions such as instance geometry and move geometry that can be used on your sketch, 'cause let's face it, Edit - Transform really blows.

YUP!!!! Forget about I-deas for the moment.... other packages like Solidworks can do this type of this MUCH better than NX.

Off the top of my foggy head, here's a few things that I-deas did so well that (IMHO) NX 4 either does poorly or needs to implement.

1- Dynamic navigator both in drafting and model sketches.
2- All the other drafting capabilities that NX chucked out the window !!!!
3- Movement of parts within assemblies.
4- Master Series style graphical interface. I-deas was well organized. NX seems very scattered. (Yes, I know this is partially a "new user complaint" but the point is STILL very valid)
5- Feature tree: The I-deas tree was SO slick in it's ability to extract feature BRANCHES.
6- Intuitive boolean operations: a continuation of #5... with I-Deas it was so easy and VISUAL to move and place multi-feature parts (see #7) and use them for cuts/joins etc. NX requires the user to jump through many hoops to achieve anywhere near this type of capability.

and perhaps the largest and most fundamental:
7- Working in Model Files where an assembly and multiple parts can happily coexist in the same space. Ahhh, the good old days.

And there are more.... perhaps NX 5 and 6 have addressed some of these. I hope so.

John - I appreciate you sharing your insight into the creation of NX. However, you must agree that the early NX product (if not still the current) bore very little resemblance to I-deas as far as the overall look and feel of the user interface. And perhaps my crack about gunplay was over the top, but the end result makes it clear that those promoting UGS carried the day over those promoting I-Deas. Hopefully NX 5, 6 and beyond will live up to the early expectations of becoming a true merge of Unigraphics and I-Deas.

I can only speak to NX4, but "state of the art" it is NOT by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[acciardi]

NX seems to me to be migrating towards a similar user experience as Solidworks and Pro/E. The workflows are about the same (notwithstanding the new Synchronous Technology) and it is pretty easy to go from one system to another.

This is a good thing for people who have to use multiple systems, but it will probably take some time for the I-Deas users to get up to speed.

On the plus side, learning a modern system will make you more marketable. I doubt if there are many shops looking for I-Deas experience these days.

Ed