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.

 

[JohnRBaker]

For the record; from day one there was never any serious consideration given to adopting an I-deas like User Interface with NX. That was a non-starter, period, which means that if you're holding out for some sort of sudden retro-shift in the near future, you're going to be disappointed. Now there's a lot more to this than I'm willing to discuss in a public forum, but I'll make you this offer.

I travel around the country attending local user group meetings (the Fall is always a very busy time for this) and if any of you who would like to get into this a bit more, just show up at one of these meetings and let me know and we'll sit down and discuss it.

Now where am I going to be? Well, today I presented at the Intermountain User Group Meeting here in Ogden, UT, so you missed that one, but I've got at least 4 more regional meetings coming up in the next 2 months:

October 14th - Annual joint Chicago/Wisconsin Area Meeting in Kenosha, WI:

http://chicago.plmworldgroups.org/

October 17th - Midwest Users Group Meeting in Minneapolis, MN:

http://mw.plmworldgroups.org/

October 30th - New York State Users Group Meeting in Rochester, NY:

http://nys.plmworldgroups.org/

November 6th - New England Users Meeting in Milford, MA:

http://ne.plmworldgroups.org/

So if anyone would like to have a face-to-face discussion of this or any other issue with respect to NX, I'm willing to sit down with anyone who takes the time to show up at one of these meetings.

And if you want to start planning for next year, just sign-up for the Siemens PLM Connection Americas 2009 in Nashville, TN, June 1-4, 2009. I'll be there and I keep the invitation open.

http://event.plmworld.org/index_2009.php

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.

 

[hudson888]

Brammy,

I thought I'd make a few comments on your points for what it is worth. My background is UG\NX and Catia so take my bias as read.

Take some advice if you will from my comments and pass on some information as recommendations that we're happy to discuss if you're happy to respond to my questions.

1- Dynamic navigator both in drafting and model sketches.

I don't know why I'm meant to want this. Seems to me that sketches are a modelling tool and that drafting is a separate tool for dimensioning 3D models. For me 2D drafting went the way of the Ark some years back, but I clearly don't know what I'm missing so why not enlighten us.

2- All the other drafting capabilities that NX chucked out the window !!!!

NX never chucked any drafting features out the window. It may have neglected to adopt something of what was in I-deas. Again why do we need this?

3- Movement of parts within assemblies.

You can move parts within NX assemblies, both in terms of manipulating the tree structure at will and in terms of repositioning them, arrangements, scenarios, motion and mating conditions or constraints. So what's missing?

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)

You can customise to re-organise the user interface in terms of structuring the icons and toolbars however you want them. It is probably a newb thing and for what it's worth the main complaint and difficultly moving between systems is always getting used to the interfaces.

5- Feature tree: The I-deas tree was SO slick in it's ability to extract feature BRANCHES.

I'll take your word for that one. I'd like a demo as it seems probable that we can do the same in NX but without a direct comparison I can't respond as to how. If you're willing to do so then start it in a new thread and I'll follow up in NX-5 when I can.

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.

Again not something that I'm sure I want and I'm betting it depends a lot on what you're used to. If you're using I-deas as a purely sketch based tool and have been struggling with coming over to the force (NX) then welcome to the world of hybrid modelling. Because NX combines parametric with non-parametric, primative features with sketches and chucks in direct modelling or synchronous technology to boot, you sometimes defer to modelling without booleans as an added technique.

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.

What makes you think you can't do that in NX? NO file in NX is purely purpose driven any file can contain assemblies, models, drawings, machining and FEA data all at the same time. It wouldn't be pretty if you chose to operate that way and we'd all rather that you didn't rain down anarchy on unsuspecting downstream users. These capacities have occurred as progressive developments in NX world so we know what it is to be without flexibility that it refers us back to a different discipline in managing the data. But to prefer that just because NX is different or used differently as recommended by your peers etc is once again probably in response to the process of adapting to change.

 

[Brammy]

Thanks for the invitation, John. I'll check the schedule and will try to attend one if it is near the Portland area.

Hi Hudson... thanks for the feedback. To be honest, I think that many of your questions would be answered if you were a former I-deas user or if I could sit down with you at an I-deas station for a few minutes. I'm sure you'd find it interesting.

>>>1- Dynamic navigator both in drafting and model sketches.
I don't know why I'm meant to want this.

Well, I dont think you realize what you are missing. It is simply that the cursor highlights parts of lines and edges more actively than NX does. For instance, NX allows you (if you look closely) to snap to the centerpoint of a sketch line and this is a good thing. In Ideas that capability is taken further with angle, endpoint, perpendicular, touching and tangent symbols that prominently display as the cursor moves over the line. This works in both 3d sketches and 2d drafting. In 2d, lines can be driven with dimensions (ala 3d sketches). It is simply a graphical aid and once you get used to it you wonder why in the world someone would choose to NOT adopt it in any other product. As for the need for 2d sketching, I guess it depends on what you are doing. I've primarily worked in the traditional solids-->drafting mode, but there have been MANY times where I've wanted a robust 2d package for a whole host of reasons.

>>>2- All the other drafting capabilities that NX chucked out the window !!!!
NX never chucked any drafting features out the window. It may have neglected to adopt something of what was in I-deas.

Well... call it "chucked" or call it "neglected" it still amounts to a drafting package (NX 4) with seriously limited capabilities. Dont you ever want to spruce up your drafting with either associated or non-associated lines etc etc? Why is drawing a 2d line that is perpendicular to an edge representation so much of a chore in NX? In Ideas AND OTHER PACKAGES a user can do that sort of thing easy as pie.

>>>3- Movement of parts within assemblies.
You can move parts within NX assemblies

Yes, but not as easily and as slickly as in Ideas. "Move THIS part from 1/3 of the way along THIS EDGE to the intersection of THESE 3 planes"............ "Make THIS corner coincident with THAT corner and angle THIS edge toward THAT point way over THERE"....... In Ideas you'd be finished with these operations in the time it takes for a couple of good yawns. Not so with NX4 (and not so with other packages like Solidworks either).

>>>4- Master Series style graphical interface.
ou can customise to re-organise the user interface in terms of structuring the icons and toolbars however you want them. It is probably a newb thing and for what it's worth the main complaint and difficultly moving between systems is always getting used to the interfaces.

Yes, it's a newbe thing... but not totally and, again, it goes beyond just reorganizing iccons. It gets into cascading menus and that is something that (IMHO) Ideas had a much better handle on than NX. I'd love to show you.

>>>Boolean operations...Again not something that I'm sure I want and I'm betting it depends a lot on what you're used to. If you're using I-deas as a purely sketch based tool and have been struggling with coming over to the force (NX) then welcome to the world of hybrid modelling. Because NX combines parametric with non-parametric, primative features with sketches and chucks in direct modelling or synchronous technology to boot, you sometimes defer to modelling without booleans as an added technique.

Oh, I'm very faniliar with the FORCE and have no problem with it. This issue really gets into "branchy modeling" (an Ideas concept", extractions, and boolean operation with multi-feature parts. Yes, NX can do some of this (with cut'n'paste of the part history, but it's not the same... trust me... and I think you'd agree after we sat with Ideas for a few minutes.

>>>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.
What makes you think you can't do that in NX?

because you cant. The Ideas workspace is different than other packages, be it NX or Solidworks or others. Ideas users on this thread will know what I'm talking about..... correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I dont believe I am.

Thanks for all the interesting feedback folks. I look forward to meeting some of you if I can make it to a Siemens event. I hope I don't sound like a stuck-in-the-mud Ideas curmudgeon, but it pains me to see a 21st century CAD package not have capabilities that have long been accepted as standard items with other CAD packages.

Onward and upward!

 

[acciardi]

I would agree with Brammy that the use of a Workspace concept is a very good thing. We've been asking Siemens to give us some better functionality than the NX/TcEng combination provides. We collaborate constantly, and there is no better mechanism for doing this than a buffer (Workspace).

In I-Deas, the user checks items out of the master vault into a Model File on your local hard drive, which can be thought of as a desktop or workbench. You can pick up parts and put them down again, use them in your assembly (or not) and pretty much do anything you like. You can bring a bunch of screws into the Model File and use them when you need them in your assembly. You can hack and slash and make pretty slides for managers and save it all locally. If you screw it all up, no biggie - just delete it and make a new Model File. When you finally have a design that is worthy of sharing with others, you 'check in' the parts and assemblies in the Model file that you like, but you still have your local version to continue to evolve or perform 'what-if' work on.

The beauty part is that if someone modifies something that you have a copy of in your Model File, you get notified that there is a newer version and you can update your Model File with the latest.

I was very surprised when I was first learning NX that there is no equivalent to this. The NX session has no way of knowing that there is a later item revision in TcEng. This was one of the best features of I-Deas and was copied by PTC when they introduced PDM and Intralink.

You can have 5 or 10 different model files all exploring different 'what-if' scenarios without the hassle of creating all new filenames or new item revisions. You can play with all the different model files for as long as you want, and just put the desired items back in the vault.

Ed

 

[MCGNX]

Brammy, I will address your points as a former I-Deas user.

1. The dynamic navigator in NX5 (I think) is very similar to I-Deas. I actually like the sketcher in NX moreso than the one in I-Deas. Mainly because of the dynamic move, and a trim command that actually trims AND constrains at the same time.

2. Drafting is a sore spot, as I mentioned above. But UGS are aware of this from (what I'm gathering as many) complaints from former I-Deas users. What they are developing is called 2D Drafting Plus and it is intended as a stand-alone drafting module for NX7. Also, you may not be aware, but for NX4 there is an NXDrafting you can download from GTAC that is essentialy I-Deas standalone drafting. I never got a chance to use or test this however as we started with NX5. Try it out and let us know because I am curious myself

3. The movement of assembly components is very easy in NX5 (another thing I like better in NX than I-Deas), so I'm assuming the "Move Component" command is not in NX4. Sounds like you are having to use Edit - Transform, and if that's the case, feel bad for you . I despise Edit - Transform, and it is also worth noting that in NX6 there is a "Move" command that virtually replaces Edit - Transform.

4. The interface I can't really give you anything on, sounds like it's just something you'll have to get used to. I for one love the "updated" style of menus and toolbars that are totally customisable. One tip I can give you is NOT to use the I-Deas role...that may be some of your problem right there.

5/6. Feature tree with branches. You know this was something I too missed at first but I got over it. I actually think NX does the Bushy Tree thing a little better than I-Deas. Why, because you can sketch your "cutter part" in place as opposed to relying on relations to position your cutter part. I do agree that the cut-paste stuff is a little harder to use, but once you figure it out, it works great. Also worth noting here is (as I mentioned in one of my previous posts) that in NX6 they have turbocharged the Reuse Library and believe me, the cut-paste stuff in there is killer and blows I-Deas away.

7. I agree their needs to be a better way. One of the hardest struggle we are having with NX is with data management. We are using TC and while I think it works great, the problem is there is no "Check-out for Reference" type option. Now this can all be resolved (I'm told) through a rather creative set-up of your TC roles and Groups, but it seems like a lot of work for one simple feature. Another thing that helps me out is I think of the NX Session the same way I would a model file. That is whatever you have out in your Session is what is being affected by the changes you make. Now of course it's not exactly the same because you have to re-pull everything out each day, but hey. And I kind of like not having the looooong check out times anymore. I also agree there should be some kind of notification of when an object has been updated or changed, and I'll say it again....NX6 has this feature.

So I guess it's easy to see that Siemens is taking into account alot of I-Deas features, and even though they are not there yet, they are putting that functionality in there. It may not have the same name, it may not even look the same....but it serves the same functionality. So in the words of Red Green, "Remember, I'm pulling for you, keep your stick on the ice, we're all in this together"

 

[hudson888]

Thanks for all you're replies. Interesting stuff. I take all your points to be completely valid exactly as you have written them. I wanted that said before I start to go on making some observations for what it is worth that may be useful to you.

Now some of what's in I-deas with different menus and whatnot the UG users would absolutely hate beyond words. It is always achingly hard when it comes to user interfaces in part because you can get so used to a thing, and also because the difference between a well designed one and a clanger can make or break a CAD system. As with all users moving between systems most of what you're posting about is pretty much informed by those observations. There are a few gems in there as to how one might look to improve drafting etc. Perhaps we'll get the chance to visit some of those again in the future.

As a UG/NX user we found that the integration with I-deas during NX and NX-2 brought some unwanted changes for us to deal with also. Many thought that a few things that were introduced probably provided familiarity with I-deas but that as experienced users we felt that they were unnecessary. You'll get users from other systems coming along from time to time and saying we have dozens of ways to make a line and you only have on or two. Our answer would be yes but if you know how to use the one or two then you can get all of the others without having to figure out which type to pick before you start. By that I mean to analogise that some things are intuitive to a trained eye in ways that don't occur for people who aren't necessarily inexperienced with CAD but simply haven't been used to a new system.

Unfortunately a lot of sites get moved from one system to another more or less all at once as a job lot. That makes for the most difficult possible transition. I have been involved with this process in both directions both as trainee and trainer mentor. The mentoring process is a useful one in that situation.

When you go from one system to another you'll correlate one tool with something familiar from your previous experience and often find yourself struggling with its inadequacies for ages. Whereas a familiar user would likely take a look and ask why are you using that we'd just do it using this other tool because it is better suited for the job. Often the functionality you expect was incorporated in a different way. And so it goes......

BTW, Red Green was a bit obscure for me, try "Git 're done!"

Cheers

Hudson

 

[JohnRBaker]

Hudson,

You've never seen 'The Red Green Show'?

http://www.redgreen.com/

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.

 

[Brammy]

Thanks for all the good feedback. It sounds like the good news is that post NX4 releases are addressing some of the hot issues. Over time I can see that MY biggest problem will simply be that (from what I can tell) my company will be on NX4 for a long time to come..... (it's complicated - dont get me started... ugh).

As for the "standalone" 2d package, hmmmmmm. Whats up with THAT? """...All we are saying, is give model-related-drafting a chance...""""... (sung, naturally, to the tune of Inagadavida). I say fuggedabout the standalone stuff, just put good drafting capabilities into the regular package. Given the state of the art in CAD packages (even el-cheapo ones) I'm still amazed that UGS didn't include decent 2d capabilities to start with.

I'll continue to monitor (with envy) how things in 5 & 6 are progressing. In summary, it seems to me that perhaps UGS needs to 'get out a bit more' and understand that if they want to be considered "state of the art" they will seriously need to reduce the number of hoops required for simple operations. With the advent of inexpensive PC packages like Solidworks and Solidedge etc etc, users nowadays have come to expect a certain level of ease and slick features.... as well they should! Hopefully UGS will continue to move in that direction.