Solidworks New Ad

[PLB]

Hey folks,

Have any of you received the latest "offer" of a free personal edition of the new Solidworks software? I received one the other day and it sounded interesting. I replied to the flyer and received a couple of pamphlets in the mail. One pamphlet refered me to their website where I could check out the local opportunities to get some training with this software package. It was also supposed to tell me about how to get my "FREE" copy of Solidworks. It hacked me off when "suddenly" the Personal Edition Solidworks wasn't going to be free after all. Apparently, you get to try it out for 90 days and then you have to buy the software to continue using it. The whole purpose of the Personal Edition is to allow users to learn at their own pace at home. While I agree with restricting the capabilities of the software to prevent over usage, I still would like to believe that a promise of free software (even in a limited capacity) ought to be forever.

I work on Autocad 8 hours a day, so, spending the extra time to learn the 3D capabilities of Solidworks would have to be done "on-my-own-time" whenever I can squeeze it in. Having a wife and family means that the 90 day trial is useless.

What do you guys think?

Paul

 

[AlexDring]

Sounds like they are trying to target people not quite as sharp as you, or who are in the office setting and dont sign the actual checks. It pretty lame offer, but I would imagine, if they get one person who signs up out of ten, its a success. Ive used and trained in SolidWorks, and Inventor. Hate them both, alot like them, but its good old fashioned Autocad I use with something I need to get done or is complicated geometry.

The thing I think is odd, is when or if you get the full blown, you still have a learning curve with the full featured version learning the new capabilities that are not currently offered with the trial version. The same thing happened with me and Alibre Software. I downloaded it and started running it. Saw some features I thought would be nice, and tried using them. After some time and a few not so nice words, I found out those features werent offered in the trail version and purchase would be required for those features. I told the sales rep, it was pretty lame to have important selling features, that they leverage off of, and dont let users feel it out and see how easy it is actually to use. Solved problem, start, programs, uninstall....

 

[EnglishMuffin]

I think you will find that it is fully functional and identical to the production version, and I think it may be useable for an unlimited period of time, provided that, each time you load it, you temporarily adjust the date on your computer to a time for which the software was officially valid. Once you have loaded it, you can adjust the date back again. The biggest problem is that the files it generates cannot be read by any other system, or even your own if you try and access files generated by the sofware on another computer, or even your original computer with, say, a new operating system. So if you upgrade to the official version, you will not be able to access any of the files you have created, and nor will anyone else.

 

[pdybeck]

I haven't read up on the Personal Edition Software from SolidWorks, but I am a current SolidWorks and AutoCAD user and have some experience with a previous version of ProE (2000 i2). I am puzzled by AlexDring's statement "but its good old fashioned AutoCAD I use with something I need to get done or is complicated geometry." I wonder how hard you tried or how much you really learned about SolidWorks and Inventor. What are things you "get done" or what is "complicated geometry"? AutoCAD is great for certain tasks, such as schematics, quick layouts, etc.. even a better tool than SolidWorks in some areas. But complicated geometry??? Get real. SolidWorks and other programs like it blow ACAD away. Try mold design, consumer product design, sheet metal, large assembly design ect... without surfacing tools, bend tools, draft analysis, undercut detection, physical dynamics, built in FEA, interfernce detection, a standard library of parts, a history tree (I could literally go on for another 2 pages). Try making a fillet in ACAD 3D, or adding draft, or creating an offset surface, filling a surface, and then try to change it. You have to add material and then remove it again. If boolean operations like these aren't bass ackwards for part design, then I don't know what is. If you can't see this, you're hoplessly lost and I don't think anyone could convince or show you the light. Sure there are times when boolean operations are handy, but only aout 5% of the time. And don't forget assembly drawings and documentation. That could be another whole discussion. True, MCAD packages have a learning curve to them. I learned SolidWorks on my own as well as ACAD and can honestly say, SolidWorks was more intuitive to learn for designing mechanical products. The reason the learning curve may be longer for SolidWorks is because it just plain does a ton more. Why? Because their customers use it, ask for more, and have their requests fufilled. Yes, more functionality means more possible things to learn. Does that mean that you use everyhting - no, most don't have the need to. ACAD just simply doesn't have the tools to create/design/document complicated things quickly, easily, or effectively. This doesn't mean that you can't do them with ACAD - I've done it - layed out a 500 or greater piece assembly in ACAD 3D and then created 2D drawings- nasty - even nastier when the design changes quickly, doubling the work by changing the unassociated 3D solid and 2D drawings. People outside my company using other software products I had talked to thought I was nuts, then I saw the light and convinced my company in the process. I have a similar design of another product in SolidWorks. There were huge differences between getting each of those designs to that point. ACAD can't compete when it comes to designs like these. Try documenting assembly drawings quickly and easily in ACAD from 3D Solids and correctly filling out a large BOM for each. MCAD packages once again rule here. I also don't understand why there are complaints about "Free" Trial Software. ITS FREE! Why would you expect a company to develop products and then give away full featured versions for free with no time limit or other restrictions involved? That would be suicide. Would you give your full featured products away to customers without compensation for "forever" time periods - obviuosly not. You wouldn't be in business very long. I think it is a great thing that SolidWorks has the free personal edition, even with strings attached. Not many other MCAD companies do this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't exactly any free ACAD trial versions that I am aware of. In fact a seat of ACAD is not much less than a full featrued seat of SolidWorks. PLB, I understand the time restrictions you may have, but if learning SolidWorks or another MCAD package is really important to you, get a good book before you get the personal edition (Try David Murray's book on SolidWorks 2003). Sacrifice some sleep (did I say that?), talk to your company about starting a small pilot project (if you work for a company rather than for yourself). I had many discussions with users of the Software. Try asking questions on the SolidWorks or Inventor discussion forum. Most are or were ACAD users and will tell you very similar things. Then talk to a reseller when you are able to stand on your own two feet in the MCAD world. Barter, bargain, hassle them, give their sales pitches right back to them by asking tough questions on the spot. I put in many late nights, because that is what it took. I read three books on the subject, I did the helpful built in tutorials, I read the moving from AutoCAD help files, and I read online. Did I learn it overnight? No. In 6 months - yes. Am I still learning things - Yes. Isn't that the case in life though, especially of an engineer - you're always learning - thats why I love it. I would rather have that from a product that I know constantly gets the attention it needs to get better and better (That is defintely not the case with ACAD - when is the last time ADESK put some really cool features in your upgrades?) Am I better off, more marketable in the job market, more valuable to my own company? You bet. Was it always easy? No. I don't know of many good things in life that are.

The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The optimist says the glass is half full. The engineer says the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[rwill19050]

You should have been invited to a short seminar where the functions are explained / shown.
You will then be given a free unlimited copy on the understanding you use it only to train yourself. It has a watermark system, but otherwise fully functional.
If you contact the guy below he will be only too happy to explain.

Harry Jenkin
Solid Solutions Management
Tel: 01926 623 160
Fax: 01926 623 161

hjenkin@solidsolutions.co.uk

http://www.solidsolutions.co.uk

Good luck

 

[EnglishMuffin]

rwill19050:
I realize that I'm displaying my ignorance, but what's a watermark system ?

 

[kurtiscat]

Right on pdybeck,, You obviously know your stuff. Try using Autocad to do 3d patent drawings of a complexity
similar to an automobile engine. It actually has caused me to want to dump Autocad for solid works ,after afriend showed me the difference.Does anyone have a suggestion for
cad packages that are better suited for patent drawings.
Also learning Solid Works for 6 months would be a joy. It took me almost 2 months off and on to complete the patent drawings LOL.

 

[Sirius2]

lol.

Although I am getting to be a 3d 'bore' by constantly harping on about the benifits of MCAD (especially the likes of Inventor).......I have to AGREE with AlexDRing that some tasks STILL cannot be done in these types of system which can be done in lowly AutoCad and Mechanical Desktop products. I know, its a controversial statement isnt it, lol.

Remember, not everyone is in 'product' 'machinery' or plastic 'Mould Tool' design.
Also, sometimes, for a one off job or a handfull of small runners a fully fledged super duper solidmodel and all the rest of it isnt always the best or quickest way to get the job done - especially under pressure.

I could name quite a few things where Autocad and MDT can win over Solidworks or Inventor etc........even in 3d space. Obviously MCAD products whip thier asses 90%+ of the time, but that last 10% of what seems to be Autocad quirks and oddments to the untrained eye can often still save your bacon.
In 2d, all those funny litle quirks like WMF and strange little tools which not many exploit can still be a godsend in some situations where a newer Mcad package just cant do it becuase of its slick approach.

Im a huge fan of Mcad softwares to the point its become a bit of an obsession - but Im afraid there is still shortfalls in the way all these systems run (the way they are all built and go about tasks) - depending on your particular trade - if your a product, mold or machinery designer you may have all the tools you need and have every base covered, but other arena's may still struggle to grasp why some basic tasks important to them still cannot be achieved as easily as thier 'old' software.

Perhaps its my lack of training, but I think there are still occasions where a more oldschool approach is the only way sometimes. Obviously, not in all cases by any means.

Pdybeck, I FULLY agree to what you said, all of it - well 95% anyway lol. Some good points there bud, just try and breathe next time! lol.


See y'all laterz

Sirius2