Should I give up on SolidWorks?

[EdDanzer]

I started using SolidWorks in January, 1996, got the first copy of Cosmos Works shipped, sent hundreds of bug notifications, helped sell their product, visited their office in person to try to fix problems, and sent in lots of enhancement request.
The problem with legacy files has become even worse, plus I now need to upgrade Cosmos Works and Cosmos Motion for a cost of over $3500.00.
I will only need the FEA and kinematics for a few projects this year, so the cost per hour of use will be more than subcontracting out the design.
So what did I gain with 2003, more crashing when working with older version assemblies, repairing mates, repairing or recreating drawing pages, resaving each file opened, and in some cases starting over. It seems I spend more time fixing problems than creating new designs.
What do you think I should do?

 

[StarrRider]

EdDanzer

I used to spend at least a half a day (quite often a lot more) trimming down an assembly for our Var to look at. I’d remove a dozen or so files at a time, do a SaveAs, then End & Restart and check to see if the problem was still there. It takes a hell of a lot of time.

Then I started sending CD's. It was a hell of a lot faster and listening to our VAR bitch about having to spend the time trimming down the assembly almost made the problem bearable. There was still a large delay when they couldn’t figure something out and had to send it to SW though. – In fact - I don’t remember ever getting a reply or a solution for one of them.

This is not a solution, I realize, but you do have a web site don’t you? When you have a problem with a 25 or 250 Meg assembly, dump the files into a directory your web can see and call your var. Give them the URL and a password and let them spend a half hour downloading the files.

At the same time, you could ask us to look at the problem. Remove anything proprietary first and throw up a questionnaire sheet asking for specifics like – Real name – Company – SW version & SP – Operating system - Comments - and what ever else you can think of that might help. Send that information to your VAR. In short, build a case that overwhelms the size of your company. – Something like: “47 other users tested this assembly and here is what they have to say.”

Good Luck

Lee

ALL of your computer problems have a simple solution - run FDISK and start over.

 

[JNR]

Hmmm...... Lots of interesting posts!

This is going to be a bit disjointed and maybe controversial.

We use SolidWorks, SmartTeam, CosmosWorks and a few other things with SW2003 on Win XP. We have at least 22 seats in the company - not all in the ME dept. Problems? What problems? We do not experience any of the horror stories you guys seem to have. What the heck are you people doing? True, we are usually one SP in arears, but that has been our safety policy for years - not just with SolidWorks. We initially had issues with graphics boards, but now we use the Quadro 750 and it is fine. You can't blame SW for trying to give performance improvement by using a extra feature of Open GL which is supposedy a standard and coincidentally not supported by some of the older graphics boards. Heck, you can't run Win XP on an Intel 286 either!!!! Technology marches on in the computing world and hardware is on a constant upgrade path. If you can't stand the heat you need to be out of the kitchen on that score - and that is not intended to be a rude remark - I know it makes things tough for the little guy. Heck, it's tough enough for us and we are part of a LARGE company.

Our assemblies and files are huge and also have extremely complex geometry, mates, etc. Some assemblies go to thousands of parts (and subassemblies). We use all kinds or ugly imported suface and solid bodies originating on other CAD systems. (Aircraft structures) We use multiple configurations and design tables. We use concurrent design via our PDM system. Our hardware is built in house. We seem to have all the things that are supposed to cause the problems, but no problems......

(Just to make you feel better, I do bitch sometimes. why the heck did they REMOVE the system option to defualt open design tables in a separate window and only allow you to choose when you open it?)

There are some things like changes to the relationships and mates solvers in 2003 (as there were in other rev changes). Sure we get the red spots and yellow triangles sometimes after conversion. That is to be expected and we just systematically solve them. I am not saying this lightly, as we have some complex design tools we have built on SW which do highly complex geometric design. Sure, it is frustrating to have to spend a little time after an upgrade to check it and fix it as necessary.

This is not a unique problem to SW. Anyone who thinks brand X is any better in this regard is wearing rose tinted glasses. I have been in the CAD business on all sides (including VAR) since 1979 and I can tell you this is not simple word processor stuff we are dealing with here. This is higly complex and often somewhat abstract data. If you want enhancements you are going to have teething troubles. The alternative is stagnation, then everyone complains about that! Luckily for you guys, you never had to deal with the older generations of CAD systems that cost into the millions (and did a whole lot less very slowly). They would suddenly come out with a new version that was completely different software and database format!! Of course, they would "help" you to afford to upgrade with a discount, yeah, right! Even with custom software AND HARDWARE we still had problems. Frankly I have had much better luck overall with SolidWorks than any other vendor/software I have dealt with in the last 24 years.

In the original post it mentions using SW in 1996 then jumps to SW 2003. It is not clear whether some or all of the intermediate revs. have been used. It is all not at all clear if the annual support contract is being purchased. Now if you are not on support it is not really surprising the the VAR is unwilling to do much for free. (Remember, I have been there! - why do you think I am not there now?)

If you are on support and not getting REASONABLE assistance, then you need to escalate through your SW regional manager and ON UP if need be. One typical problem (as I well know) can be that the VAR identifies the problem but the customer does not like the solution (usually based on cost). Well......? Like I said, it is rough world in the computing business, particularly for the little guy with small budgets.

I guess the bottom line is that you have to decide is, is it better the devil I know than the devil I don't? Did you buy more software than you need (or can afford)? Should you bite the bullet and back another horse? (That's going to be pretty expensive too initially). Just don't go that way and in 3 years be writing to their news group complaining and lamenting the good old days of SolidWorks because your new problems now seem terrible and you have forgotten (or maybe gained a better appreciation of) the issues you had with SW.

As you see, I am somewhat but not entirely sympathetic. As an experienced VAR, system manager and support engineering in the past, I see some familiar traits in some of the comments being made. I have been there and I am realistic about it.

I get the feeling you have already decided and are merely looking for reinforcement. Please do not look to us all for strokes and justification to make your decision. Good luck with your decision whichever way you go and I truely mean that, but it has to be your own decision.

 

[StarrRider]

JNR

I try not to think that far back – but – OK. 21 or 22 years ago I was in school using a program called DraftCAD on a Huston Instruments server (Actually – it was owned by Bausch & Lomb) with a custom network. The reason the school had purchased this system was that the instructor could monitor any user in any locations and provide support. The users could also obviously ask for help when they needed it.
I had been doing 16 CH and was maintaining a 3.9 GPA when this first became available. I jumped on it and took the first 3 (12 hrs) CAD courses. They packed so many bodies on that system that there were actually fights to get on the system. If that was bad enough - every other week some bonehead did something that caused the network to crash. This resulted in an Engineer getting on a plane and flying in to fix it – a minimum of 3 or 4 days down time.
For the first time ever – I failed 2 of the 3 courses - and my GPA took a nosedive. Worse still, my financial aid was cut in half because I dropped under 12 hours. Both courses were repeated the next semester but I only managed to pass 1 of them. I did Ace all 5 courses - but it took 5 semesters to do it.

With SolidWorks - I could do any of those courses in a day - two at the most.

No – I do not like to remember those days.

Lee

You must remember one thing. You are UNIQUE!!! Just like everyone else!!!

 

[EdDanzer]

JNR,
We have use SolidWorks since 1996, gave testimonials to people looking at migrating from 2D to 3D, had models used for advertising in 1996,and 1997. I estimate our investment in SolidWorks is over $150,000.00 on labor and maintenance. We have created over 20,000 SolidWorks files and been current on all maintenance until this year and we can’t justify the Cosmos maintenance. We estimate we will use Cosmos less than 50 hours. We don’t want to throw that investment away, yet this last release in general has cost dearly to use. With the current economy we don’t have the resources to maintain the file problems that have been created.

 

[StarrRider]

EdDanzer

I hate to agree with JNR, but it does sound like you have made up your mind. I don’t have any idea where you think the grass will be greener, but it does seem obvious that you intend to find out.

I think part of your problem is your outlook. Read back through the posts that you have made in just this thread. A recurring theme seems to be – Look how much this costs me. I am not saying that you are making up numbers – only that you may be spending too much time looking at only half of the numbers. Not once have you mentioned how much the software has made you. Not once have you stated that you are getting more work done per hour than ever before.

I think we have both used enough different CAD systems to be able to judge them critically. For myself, I have never been more productive, been able to do more things in less time – than I have since I made the transition to SolidWorks. I have made better LOOKING drawings in other programs – I have a portfolio full of them - but the amount of time I spent making them was phenomenal.

That doesn’t say that I do not get disgusted with SolidWorks when it does a CTD or when I loose an hour’s work - because I do. I try to place the blame where I think it belongs. I know that SolidWorks has stability issues, so if I loose much more than an hour or two – in a week – then it’s my own damn fault. Yes – I could blame the software – but that is like suing McDonalds because they served me the hot coffee I ordered. It just doesn’t make a lot of sense and it is counter productive.

I do know that many people are going to miss your presence - at least - I will.

Good Luck and God Speed – I think I will shut up now.

Lee

You must remember one thing. You are UNIQUE!!! Just like everyone else!!!

 

[EdDanzer]

Well we have not found a better choice than SolidWorks, it just drives me nuts. When we program a CNC machine in G code we can use the file for years, change a few lines of code and move the program to another machine. I have a program to machine a parabola that was done in 1984 and was used in 1999 in a different machine with very little modification this could run on my current machine with less than 30 minutes worth of work. An assembly file created in SolidWorks last year may need 1 to 2 hours of additional work just to print production drawings when no changes have been made.
Am I the only person how hates to do the same thing over after doing it correctly the first time? Maybe it’s because I get paid to do it once.

 

[Rocko]

I have used numerous CAD packages both 3d and 2d and i have come to one conclusion. There is no perfect CAD package. Once you finally let yourself come to grips with this you then can become more productive.

 

[JNR]

I hear what you say, but remember that G code is pretty simplistic stuff (AND INDUSTRY STANDARD) as is the math definition of a parabola. It illustrates my "word processor" analogy. Characters, words (one word = n characters with a certain special characters at either end), paragraphs, etc. And all using STANDARD ASCII codes. The only difference is in the cute stuff to format documents. It is not rocket science and the results can be easily moved from one software to another and translated (yeah, I know even then there are problems - blame Bill Gates if you need to find a scapegoat). CAD software deals with vastly more abstract data and data manipulation. Every system handles things differently - heck, just look at the mind boggling issue of mapping "flat" drawings of 3D objects!!! There is (and never will be) any real standardization in the CAD world, except for some companies using the same solids kernel. I have more power on my desk top today than all the CAD systems used to design the Boeing 757 aircraft put together. Then you have all of us lot demanding more stuff and faster delivery and perfection for next to nothing - ain't going to happen! Too many lines of code. You just can not test every combination. You just can't run a full-up Monte Carlo type test on all possible combinations in a product like SolidWorks or its competitors. Like some of you said, no system out there is perfect and whichever horse you back it WILL and DOES have its similar problems from time to time. I'm not saying SolidWorks is any better or worse just that when you jump over the fence, you will find the grass is no greener after all. Oh, it will look green and taste different at first as you joyously cavort in unfamiliar pastures, but as you become more accustomed to it and learn to graze more proficiently, up will pop the weeds again!! Sawing off two blocks of wood, match drilling them and screwing them together is a simple operation in the real world. You try to write a program to fully simulate that and then tell me you don't get it. Most people have no idea of the gross complexity involved. One problem is that in the bad old days of "wire frame" the user was much more aware of the realtiy of the situation. With today's solids systems, the simulation of the real world is so good that we lose sight of the fact that it is indeed nothing but a highly complex simulation.

Here's another interesting thought for you. Remember what happened to ProE selling for what - average $16K a seat and along comes SolidWorks and cuts their legs out from under them at $4k a pop? Heck they were charging $7k for annual maintenance! (Of course the fact that ProE were trying to peddle it like arrogant used car salesmen at the time didn't help.) Ever see a ProE user move to SolidWorks and see their eyes light up first time they go to change something near the front of the database?

(BTW: StarrRider, we must both be REAL oldtimers - I remember the Bausch and Lomb stuff!!)

Frankly, if you NEED COSMOS, but can't afford to pay for it, you are underfunded and in the wrong business. Sorry to bring reality into this, but that's a plain fact. You will just have to employ an subcontractor to do the anaylsis and figure the cost in your bid. Or there are packages that you can rent by usage. If that makes your bid too high - there's a message in that for you. Sorry to be blunt my friend but it's a tough world specially for the little guy. Believe me, I do sympathize with that problem.

Ya know, Rocko's two liner sums this entire thread up nicely. I will also shut up now......