Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Solidworks Vs Solid edge 1
- Thread starter mk2000
- Start date
Test them both out and see which one works better for you.
Look over the web.
I'm sure this has been discussed some where.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP![[borg2]](/data/assets/smilies/borg2.gif "[borg2] [borg2]")
faq731-376
Look over the web.
I'm sure this has been discussed some where.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
faq731-376
-
1
- #4
Frankly, either one will work for you. I've used various releases of SE, Inv, and SWX. Certainly different packages have different strengths. However, with each release they seem to leap-frog each other.
Consider which reseller has the best support in your area and also the price.
The other point to consider is that while SE is a very good package, it may be consigned to the same fate as WordPerfect. Being good or better does not guarantee survival. SWX has a larger market share (and is growing faster) than SE. That means that you're more likely to find customers/vendors using SWX than SE. You're also more likely to find people who know SWX over SE (though to me, if you know how to model then jumping between packages is not that big a deal). Finally, you would be making yourself more marketable by learning SWX than SE. Just take a gander through Monster to see the relative number of postings looking for SWX experience as opposed to SE.
SE is a good package but I don't think it's got sufficient market penetration to hold on. I believe it's destined to become the WordPerfect or 123 of the modeling world.
Consider which reseller has the best support in your area and also the price.
The other point to consider is that while SE is a very good package, it may be consigned to the same fate as WordPerfect. Being good or better does not guarantee survival. SWX has a larger market share (and is growing faster) than SE. That means that you're more likely to find customers/vendors using SWX than SE. You're also more likely to find people who know SWX over SE (though to me, if you know how to model then jumping between packages is not that big a deal). Finally, you would be making yourself more marketable by learning SWX than SE. Just take a gander through Monster to see the relative number of postings looking for SWX experience as opposed to SE.
SE is a good package but I don't think it's got sufficient market penetration to hold on. I believe it's destined to become the WordPerfect or 123 of the modeling world.
As an example of what I stated previously, go check out some part models at McMaster-Carr. I just looked at a U-bolt and it's available in a variety of formats, including STEP and SAT - both of which can be imported by SE. However, it's also available of a a native SWX part which means that it it can be more easily and reliably modified.
Unless the price difference is significant, I'd go with SolidWorks.
Unless the price difference is significant, I'd go with SolidWorks.
![[thumbsdown]](/data/assets/smilies/thumbsdown.gif "[thumbsdown] [thumbsdown]")
DesignSmith
Mechanical
- Nov 25, 2003
- 72
If you believe industry pundits like Joe Greco and the others, Solid Edge is certainly a worthy package. However, the big problem is dealer support. Particularly in my area the few EDS dealers are more interested in pushing services such as overpriced contract designers, rather selling and servicing SE seats.
Some SW dealers are better than others, but you also have a strong user group community, and top forums like this one, backing them up.
Also consider surveying your customers and vendors. Try to get an idea which package is more popular among them. That should be a good indicator of the service in your area and the ability to find experienced talent.
DesignSmith
Some SW dealers are better than others, but you also have a strong user group community, and top forums like this one, backing them up.
Also consider surveying your customers and vendors. Try to get an idea which package is more popular among them. That should be a good indicator of the service in your area and the ability to find experienced talent.
DesignSmith
RawheadRex
Mechanical
It's been a few years but I was part of a team that evaluated both packages (SW & SE). I also had the opportunity to spend the better part of a week in a training class for VARs with a group of guys who sold SW and SE (I was the lone "user" in the class). During that time I got some perspective which admittedly partisan at times but candid as well I believe.
My recollections from those conversations are that each camp felt that their package had clear advantages over the other. Primarily though they seemed to agree that SW was a better platform for machined/molded components and that SE was the way to go for sheet metal functionality. Now obviously quite a bit has happened in development over the intervening years so the statements might well be quite outdated.
Additionally SE had some built "data management" tools as I remember. These were a significant factor in its favor during our evaluation and gave us pause before we ultimately went with SW.
By all means I would encourage you to learn as much as you can about each package. Try to think about the types of components and assemblies that you design and the various operations involved in their manufacture that you'll be trying to emulate within the Solid Modeling environment. Have examples of the type of work you do when meeting with the VAR reps. Have them show you how the product can help you do YOUR job better rather than show you the canned demo. These are all things we did that ultimately assisted us in making the right choice for us in that company at that time.
Hope this info was of some usefulness to you.
Chris Gervais
Sr. Mechanical Designer
Lytron Corp.
My recollections from those conversations are that each camp felt that their package had clear advantages over the other. Primarily though they seemed to agree that SW was a better platform for machined/molded components and that SE was the way to go for sheet metal functionality. Now obviously quite a bit has happened in development over the intervening years so the statements might well be quite outdated.
Additionally SE had some built "data management" tools as I remember. These were a significant factor in its favor during our evaluation and gave us pause before we ultimately went with SW.
By all means I would encourage you to learn as much as you can about each package. Try to think about the types of components and assemblies that you design and the various operations involved in their manufacture that you'll be trying to emulate within the Solid Modeling environment. Have examples of the type of work you do when meeting with the VAR reps. Have them show you how the product can help you do YOUR job better rather than show you the canned demo. These are all things we did that ultimately assisted us in making the right choice for us in that company at that time.
Hope this info was of some usefulness to you.
Chris Gervais
Sr. Mechanical Designer
Lytron Corp.
To disagree with Beggar, you can't look at the activity level in the eng-tips forum. Most posts are in the private Solid Edge newsgroup hosted on the UGS servers. You need to be SE maintenance subscribers to get access. That has all the traffic and you get direct answers from SE support many times, unlike here. That is where the traffic is and is hidden from public eyes.
Also, this has more traffic, not necessarily because it is a better program, but because SWX did a better marketing job and has a larger market share. More seats = more users with questions = more posts to any and all forums.
The question of longevity of SE is just misunderstandings about the corporate umbrella that SE is under. SE and UG just got bought out by private investors from EDS. This is very good news for both CAD packages because EDS only advertised its IT services, never its products. As its own company, you will start seeing marketting ads for SE and UG and therefore I think they'll start regaining market share from SWX.
To get back on topic. The only difference between SWX and SE is workflow. I like tell the software what I want to accomplish and it gives me step-by-step on how to get there. This is SE's workflow. With SWX, you start with a sketch and tell the program what to make of the sketch (and in my case only to be yelled at that I didn't include enough info to actually create that feature.) Other than that, you SE and SWX are the same, feature-for-feature, realizing that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Just because you do it one way in one CAD package doesn't mean it can't be done in another simply because you don't do it the same way.
If you're on a tight budget, I'd also look at Alibre Design.
--Scott
For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376
Also, this has more traffic, not necessarily because it is a better program, but because SWX did a better marketing job and has a larger market share. More seats = more users with questions = more posts to any and all forums.
The question of longevity of SE is just misunderstandings about the corporate umbrella that SE is under. SE and UG just got bought out by private investors from EDS. This is very good news for both CAD packages because EDS only advertised its IT services, never its products. As its own company, you will start seeing marketting ads for SE and UG and therefore I think they'll start regaining market share from SWX.
To get back on topic. The only difference between SWX and SE is workflow. I like tell the software what I want to accomplish and it gives me step-by-step on how to get there. This is SE's workflow. With SWX, you start with a sketch and tell the program what to make of the sketch (and in my case only to be yelled at that I didn't include enough info to actually create that feature.) Other than that, you SE and SWX are the same, feature-for-feature, realizing that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Just because you do it one way in one CAD package doesn't mean it can't be done in another simply because you don't do it the same way.
If you're on a tight budget, I'd also look at Alibre Design.
--Scott
For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376
swertel, well said.
As an early user of SE, I also agree that its lack of market share has nothing to do with its quality as a program. It's very good.
I genuinely hope I prove to be wrong about its longevity. No doubt that SWX is a much better program than it would've been otherwise without the creativity of the SE team.
Granted, SWX doesn't have the same ability as MS had to force their products to the forefront but I'm still concerned that users' desires for a defacto standard will keep SE down and may ultimately kill it. Of course, this hasn't happened in the FEA world where multiple packages still coexist.
As an early user of SE, I also agree that its lack of market share has nothing to do with its quality as a program. It's very good.
I genuinely hope I prove to be wrong about its longevity. No doubt that SWX is a much better program than it would've been otherwise without the creativity of the SE team.
Granted, SWX doesn't have the same ability as MS had to force their products to the forefront but I'm still concerned that users' desires for a defacto standard will keep SE down and may ultimately kill it. Of course, this hasn't happened in the FEA world where multiple packages still coexist.
One additional issue with SE longevity is that the owners are a bit like CV was years ago. They own too many CAD packages and from a business point of view will have to consolidate. That might well start with the low sales performers as much as for technical issues. Most of the competing packages are pretty capable and they tend to leapfrog eachother in the details over the years. So just because something is lacking today, it may well be the other way round next year. One thing you do want to do is ensure longevity, because translating data from a legacy system to your newest system of choice is a royal pain, incomplete and very expensive. So do your research on this subject thoroughly and don't just go on sales person promises - either a those selling a system or its competitors sales force.
John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr.
Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics
There are only 10 types of people in the world - those who understand binary and those who don't.
John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr.
Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics
There are only 10 types of people in the world - those who understand binary and those who don't.
- Status
