> Hej gruppe
>
> Jeg vil gerne høre om der er nogen som kender 3D-CAD systemerne på markedet
> så godt, at de vil anbefale et af produkterne som værende det mest effektive
> værktøj til almindelig maskinkonstruktion. Jeg tænker specielt på systemerne
> Pro Engineer, Solid Works, Autodesks Inventor eller eventuelt andre.
>
> Med venlig hilsen
> Bjarne Larsen
>
Hej, nedenstående er et uddrag af nogle brugeres erfaringer på en
diskussionsgruppe jeg fandt.
mvh Søren
**************
Subject: Why did YOU decide on Inventor?
From: "Per Eriksson" <per.eriksson@holms.REMOVE.com>
Newsgroups: autodesk.inventor.support
Hello group,
We are in the process of switching to a new CAD-system and it has boiled
down to Inventor or Solidworks and I can imagine many of you have made
the same choice so I figured I might ask what tipped the scale for you.
We are 5 users that serve a company of 130 employees with design and
construction of machinery in the form of attachments to various makes
and models of wheelloaders, trucks, and farmtractors. All our designs is
made up of profiles, sheetmetal and such welded together in varying
deegrees of complexity. the normal part count is around 1500 - 2000 in
an assy.
I really can't put my finger on it but I like IV over SW so far and I
think IV has greater "forward" momentum than SW regarding development.
What I like is the general layout of the program, easy to navigate and
no clutter. Adaptive design and iparts are nice too.
The bad part is that IV has shorter time on the market and therefore
fewer applications has been developed and adapted to fit IV than SW.
such as datamanagment for ex.
What I would like to see in IV is better measuring tools in the
part/assy context and some improvments in sketchmode. Drawings could use
some tweaking too.
What are your thoughts on the future of IV, is it a SW killer?
/Per
********************
Subject: Re: Why did YOU decide on Inventor?
From: Richard Hinterhoeller <rhinterhoeller@home.com>
Newsgroups: autodesk.inventor.support
Can't comment on Solidworks as I have no experience with it.
I chose Inventor because I liked the advances made in AutoCAD over the
years. I assumed Autodesk would improve the product rapidly and they
have. Each release solves problems I didn't even realize I had until I
saw the solutions.
I have become reluctant to point out IV's deficiencies on this news
group, not for fear of being flamed, but because it usually turns out
that the capability already exists but I just haven't discovered it yet.
The downside to this rapidly evolving scene is the lack of
documentation. Thats where this newsgroup fills the void. I sneak in
here 5 to 10 times a day to learn a few tricks.
Richard
***************
Subject: Re: Why did YOU decide on Inventor?
From: "Ron Crain" <ron@arken.net>
Newsgroups: autodesk.inventor.support
I tried many times to like SW, never could do that. After using
Inventor for a year, I can say that Inventor seems to require fewer
mouse clicks to do what I want than SW - a feature that is worth it's
weight in gold for my poor wrist. I have discussions with a colleague
who bounces back and forth between the two and he also prefers Inventor
- it just seems more intuitive and flexible than the other one.
I DO like the eDrawings that the other package produces though -
**************
Subject: Re: Why did YOU decide on Inventor?
From: enricribas <enricribas@usa.net>
Newsgroups: autodesk.inventor.support
Yes, you are all right with the complaints. For us, the BOM is not
useful, as in CAD you sometimes break up assemblies very differently
from what you want in the shop. It does crash, but that is getting less
and less with each version. The reason we went with IV is adaptivity. We
also tried the different packages SolidEdge, SolidWorks, and IronCAD
they all seem great compared to AutoCAD. So I bought IronCAD, which has
a lot of neat features, but it's a toy when doing real work. (although I
wish IV would steal some ideas especially the Tri-Ball! It's patented
but if they made something similar...) Anyway, I returned IronCAD in a
matter of weeks, because that's when it hit me as to what adaptivity
really was. Try to make a connection link that changes shape to join two
pins in all the programs, and you will see the power of IV. <p>my
humble opinion.
****************