andreskralj
Industrial
Could somebody please explain the difference between what one or the other does? I mean Solid edge can model, asemble, animate and be adapted for a CAM software... NX 4 does the same thing and what more?
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
NX 4 Vs. Solid Edge V19
- Thread starter andreskralj
- Start date
- Status
toniechang
Industrial
NX has integrated CAM and top free form capabilities ...
Hudson888, I am interested in understanding why people love NX so much. I have been trying to learn it the last 4 months at a new job, and I have found it leaving a bad taste in my mouth. I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I have 3 years of full-time solidworks experience and in my humble opinion solidworks is a better program. But as a side note I am only doing modeling and assembly work. I can believe that NX has more functionality out of the box, but solidworks has add-ins for everything that NX will do. I know that for huge corporations, such as GM, that NX is probably a better solution, but that is not the application I'm talking about. Please straighten me out if you can, because I have to learn NX like it or not!!
Its not an add-in....as in you don't have to pay for it like NX. NX has more options, but you'll pay handsomely for it. If you really need it though, then $$$ is a small price to pay for wasted time. If you don't need it....then why bother with NX.
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
CADWHORE,
First, no offense intended, but if you only created models and assemblies, then how can you say SolidWorks is better if you've never used all of the modules for both softwares AND you've used NX for only a few months? Seems pretty biased off the bat, so it's no wonder you're struggling with NX....you've already decided it's not any better, or at least that's what your post is reading like to me. You'd be surprised how much easier it is to learn something with an open mindset.
Next, I don't recall anyone here saying they loved NX. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if you'd do a little reading on the UGS BBS Notes you'd find far more complaints than adoration regarding NX. ALL softwares have their downsides to them and users of softwares tend to be loyal users, especially if they've been using it for 10+ years.
Sure, SolidWorks can do SOME things in a much more efficient manner than NX....then again, SolidWorks wasn't around 25 years ago, was it? It's a NEW (at least new compared to NX, I-DEAS, CATIA and others) software that was written from scratch about 10 or 15 years ago....a baby compared to some of the softwares that have been absorbed into high-end CAD softwares, of which only ONE has been totally re-written from scratch recently and that is CATIA v5 and even it has things that it cannot do very well.
In regards to your struggling with NX....that says to me that SolidWorks does things in a very structured manner, which doesn't translate very well to other CAD softwares. Do you really think that is a GOOD thing? I've been using NX for close to 15 years now and I've routinely been able to sit down at other CAD softwares, without ever using them before, and have a good understanding of how to model with them.
What exactly are you struggling with in regards to NX...is there a particular area (modeling, sketching, drafting) that is giving you fits? I'm sure some of the regular posters might be able to offer some assistance or advice.
Have you been to ANY introductory training yet, particularly any UGS-offered courses?
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
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.
First, no offense intended, but if you only created models and assemblies, then how can you say SolidWorks is better if you've never used all of the modules for both softwares AND you've used NX for only a few months? Seems pretty biased off the bat, so it's no wonder you're struggling with NX....you've already decided it's not any better, or at least that's what your post is reading like to me. You'd be surprised how much easier it is to learn something with an open mindset.
Next, I don't recall anyone here saying they loved NX. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if you'd do a little reading on the UGS BBS Notes you'd find far more complaints than adoration regarding NX. ALL softwares have their downsides to them and users of softwares tend to be loyal users, especially if they've been using it for 10+ years.
Sure, SolidWorks can do SOME things in a much more efficient manner than NX....then again, SolidWorks wasn't around 25 years ago, was it? It's a NEW (at least new compared to NX, I-DEAS, CATIA and others) software that was written from scratch about 10 or 15 years ago....a baby compared to some of the softwares that have been absorbed into high-end CAD softwares, of which only ONE has been totally re-written from scratch recently and that is CATIA v5 and even it has things that it cannot do very well.
In regards to your struggling with NX....that says to me that SolidWorks does things in a very structured manner, which doesn't translate very well to other CAD softwares. Do you really think that is a GOOD thing? I've been using NX for close to 15 years now and I've routinely been able to sit down at other CAD softwares, without ever using them before, and have a good understanding of how to model with them.
What exactly are you struggling with in regards to NX...is there a particular area (modeling, sketching, drafting) that is giving you fits? I'm sure some of the regular posters might be able to offer some assistance or advice.
Have you been to ANY introductory training yet, particularly any UGS-offered courses?
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
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.
Been using NX4 for a year now. In principle, they all work about the same way, and I can, like Tim, move from SW to NX to Pro/E without too much trouble.
Having said that though, I would have to say that NX is 'quirkier' than the others. I can do anything with it, but it almost always takes longer. Assembly constraints are the suck (supposedly fixed in NX5) and probably one of the more frustrating things to do. No way to redefine constraints, no auto recognition of valid operations based on topology, come on...
Another one - to create a split draft you have to create a sketch, then split the surface, then apply separate draft features to both sides of the parting curve. In Pro/E it was done in one feature; NX takes four. Another minor nit - no ability to define diameter dims in the sketch, workaound is to mirror the entities about the revolve axis and flip 1/2 the sketch to reference, but it is extra work.
Some things that you may come to like about NX:
Parts and Assemblies are pretty interchangable. In Pro or SW did you ever create a very complex drawing of a part, only to have to add a pin or something, which requires that it become an assembly? But you can't turn a part into an assembly, so you get to do the whole drawing over again. You won't get this problem with NX.
Their rendering tools are also first-rate.
Also, if you have to create a bunch of wireframe geometry, NX has all the entity creation tools from 30 years ago. I created a complex truss for a school project for my son in just a few minutes - it would have taken hours in Pro. (I know about SW 3D curves, but it's still difficult).
In a perfect world, I'd take Pro/E mainly because its regen speed is so fast, and I love the sketcher. I'm still skeptical about the usefullness of hybrid modelers. I fully constrain all my sketches all the time anyway, so why not have the system do it for me, like Pro/E does?
Having said that though, I would have to say that NX is 'quirkier' than the others. I can do anything with it, but it almost always takes longer. Assembly constraints are the suck (supposedly fixed in NX5) and probably one of the more frustrating things to do. No way to redefine constraints, no auto recognition of valid operations based on topology, come on...
Another one - to create a split draft you have to create a sketch, then split the surface, then apply separate draft features to both sides of the parting curve. In Pro/E it was done in one feature; NX takes four. Another minor nit - no ability to define diameter dims in the sketch, workaound is to mirror the entities about the revolve axis and flip 1/2 the sketch to reference, but it is extra work.
Some things that you may come to like about NX:
Parts and Assemblies are pretty interchangable. In Pro or SW did you ever create a very complex drawing of a part, only to have to add a pin or something, which requires that it become an assembly? But you can't turn a part into an assembly, so you get to do the whole drawing over again. You won't get this problem with NX.
Their rendering tools are also first-rate.
Also, if you have to create a bunch of wireframe geometry, NX has all the entity creation tools from 30 years ago. I created a complex truss for a school project for my son in just a few minutes - it would have taken hours in Pro. (I know about SW 3D curves, but it's still difficult).
In a perfect world, I'd take Pro/E mainly because its regen speed is so fast, and I love the sketcher. I'm still skeptical about the usefullness of hybrid modelers. I fully constrain all my sketches all the time anyway, so why not have the system do it for me, like Pro/E does?
Hey Tim, that doesn't sound right about Seimens 'going after' SW. I mean, they do license the kernal, right?
Lots of other people do too.
I even remember a few years back UGS and PTC signed a letter of intent or some such to make the kernals fully interoperable. I wonder what became of that?
Sorry, I'm drunk and rambling...
Lots of other people do too.
I even remember a few years back UGS and PTC signed a letter of intent or some such to make the kernals fully interoperable. I wonder what became of that?
Sorry, I'm drunk and rambling...
Interoperability is there. Wildfire 2 can opena UG/NX part file and NX4 can open a Pro/E part or assembly file.
The way they were implemented was different, however. NX can open a Pro/E file without Pro/E on your workstation. Pro/E requires NX on your workstation to open a NX file.
For both systems, these are extra cost modules, with the PTC price about double the UGS price.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications
The way they were implemented was different, however. NX can open a Pro/E file without Pro/E on your workstation. Pro/E requires NX on your workstation to open a NX file.
For both systems, these are extra cost modules, with the PTC price about double the UGS price.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications
Hey Cadwhore,
Chill Brother! I responded to a question about NX vs Solid Edge not Solid Works. So the comparison isn't a direct one. Nor did I mean to seriously offend anyone. I think I can have a wee dig a Solid Edge because it comes from the same Stable as UG.
For those who care for my opinion after almost 20 years on UG it is all too easy for me to praise the product because I admittedly have a high level of comfort with it. If I use other systems at all then its Catia, Pro-E or one of the surfacing packages Alias or Rhino. I don't use a lot of sketches and I love the freedom that gives me to design without the strict discipline required by some other systems to deal with the mechanics of making geometry. I revel in carving away at a solid using all the wonderful tools that UG has including surfacing and direct modeling.
I recently did some work with a company taking a group of Solid Edge users into UG. We all found it a very interesting experience to be able to give them the option of using some of the really powerful tools that UG has to take short cuts and be more productive. Sometimes you need to be structured and mindful of how your model is built and sometimes you just need to "git 'er done". Knowing when is the thing, having the option is the difference between walking and crawling.
Please don't get offended. It confuses me! I mean why come to this forum if you don't like UG.
Regards,
Hudson
Chill Brother! I responded to a question about NX vs Solid Edge not Solid Works. So the comparison isn't a direct one. Nor did I mean to seriously offend anyone. I think I can have a wee dig a Solid Edge because it comes from the same Stable as UG.
For those who care for my opinion after almost 20 years on UG it is all too easy for me to praise the product because I admittedly have a high level of comfort with it. If I use other systems at all then its Catia, Pro-E or one of the surfacing packages Alias or Rhino. I don't use a lot of sketches and I love the freedom that gives me to design without the strict discipline required by some other systems to deal with the mechanics of making geometry. I revel in carving away at a solid using all the wonderful tools that UG has including surfacing and direct modeling.
I recently did some work with a company taking a group of Solid Edge users into UG. We all found it a very interesting experience to be able to give them the option of using some of the really powerful tools that UG has to take short cuts and be more productive. Sometimes you need to be structured and mindful of how your model is built and sometimes you just need to "git 'er done". Knowing when is the thing, having the option is the difference between walking and crawling.
Please don't get offended. It confuses me! I mean why come to this forum if you don't like UG.
Regards,
Hudson
acciardi,
Yes, they do license the kernel but that by no means implies that Siemens wants to see one of the top competitors to 2 of their products keep using the kernel that they more or less own. It makes perfect sense to make things as difficult as possible on SW. Besides, that's just something I heard and it really cannot be debated until it does or does not happen.
In regards to NX4...forget about it...it doesn't compare to NX5 at all in my opinion. Yes, NX is quirky at times, but I mainly chalk that up to what all UGS is trying to accomplish at the same time: improve the product, add new features/commands/interface operation while at the same time making all of it seem familiar to I-DEAS users that will be migrating to NX. Yeah, it sucks going through all those changes and bugs, but in the end NX is a much stronger product than it was 2 years ago and if UGS stays on this path, it will become even better.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
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.
Yes, they do license the kernel but that by no means implies that Siemens wants to see one of the top competitors to 2 of their products keep using the kernel that they more or less own. It makes perfect sense to make things as difficult as possible on SW. Besides, that's just something I heard and it really cannot be debated until it does or does not happen.
In regards to NX4...forget about it...it doesn't compare to NX5 at all in my opinion. Yes, NX is quirky at times, but I mainly chalk that up to what all UGS is trying to accomplish at the same time: improve the product, add new features/commands/interface operation while at the same time making all of it seem familiar to I-DEAS users that will be migrating to NX. Yeah, it sucks going through all those changes and bugs, but in the end NX is a much stronger product than it was 2 years ago and if UGS stays on this path, it will become even better.
Tim Flater
Senior Designer
Enkei America, Inc.
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.
Re: SW - I had assumed that UGS got a significant portion of their revenue from the Parasolid licensees. Either way I guess they can take their ball and go home.
Re: NX5 - so far I see lots of improvements. I really hope so, because I have been very disappointed with NX4. I mean conceptually it is fine, and very flexible, but in practice our site has had a lot of issues not related to user training or configuration. 4 just seemed 'unfinished' to me.
Re: interoperability - thanks Ben, that's what I thought.
Re: NX5 - so far I see lots of improvements. I really hope so, because I have been very disappointed with NX4. I mean conceptually it is fine, and very flexible, but in practice our site has had a lot of issues not related to user training or configuration. 4 just seemed 'unfinished' to me.
Re: interoperability - thanks Ben, that's what I thought.
For the person (ewh) that asked about freeform in SolidWorks. This was added in the core product in the 2007 version. It currently is limited to 4 sided surfaces. Here are some demos...
Comes in handy for things like defining the profile of say a joystick handle in a single feature. Much easier to click and drag and control curvature, weighting, etc... Don't know how UG works. I would be curious to see a video of UG. I'm sure its freeform surfacing capabilities far surpass this - I would hope so for the money.
Pete
Comes in handy for things like defining the profile of say a joystick handle in a single feature. Much easier to click and drag and control curvature, weighting, etc... Don't know how UG works. I would be curious to see a video of UG. I'm sure its freeform surfacing capabilities far surpass this - I would hope so for the money.
Pete
Might be a bit of confusing on what "Freeform" is to UG versus SolidWorks. Freeform in UG is a module which give you access to a number of tools. The freeform tools are things like Lofts and sweeps, boundary type surfces, etc. Many of these things have been in the core Solid for years. What Solidworks calls "Freeform" is a feature added to 2007 that allows you to push and pull on a 4 sided surface. I think UG has something similar but you have to buy the a studio surface module or something.
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
Jason
SolidWorks 2007 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2
- Status
