passaggio solid edge st4 a solidworks 2016: come fare

[cacciatorino]

Yes, I read, but it is a post of 2010 and little specific; I am not interested in propaganda (and as we know many on the forum yes); I care to put on a sheet of white paper the +sw -se and +se -sw commands.

It'll be little specific to you, it was about the discrimination between employing one or two hours to make a drawing, and if you allow at the end of the day some difference would make it.

If I have to be honest, you behave in the same way as the many sellers, obvious or unknown, who have come to this forum. I would advise you to have a more collaborative and less challenging tone, and a more open dialogue attitude to doubt, otherwise the thought of being in front of a user who has "other" interests is quite present.

 

[marcof]

Surely, the choice is not due to the commercial passing by chance (I don't know how a consideration like that could come to mind...).

the commercial obviously did not pass by chance, but to replace the entire license park because it is its primary goal. You will not think, I hope, that you care about the industrial growth plans of your company. the commercial must sell, and if it manages to sell 10 licenses to the fruiting it under the house they reward it as well!
the fact that I thought of such a consideration I explained it with the metaphor of the body of two different colors.

Of course, if you tell me that you have a 15-part historian and 2-axioms and 30 2d boards all modeled in a very bad way then actually the purchase of swx is not configured as a passage but simply by giving start to the use of a different cad, so the historian does not exist and the previous cad was there by mistake.
If instead, I return to repeat myself, the historian is consistent (you want to give us an idea of how many pieces-table-assiemi we are talking in your case?) then a change of cad is always a bloodbath because there is to remake everything, regardless of what the technicians and the commercials of the swx and the tools of recovery of the features from neutral models that we know all work as it seems to them, so not only serve center of not

do two accounts in terms of time (so economic) know what it would cost to do training as you owe to the staff and then arrange the models of the historian in itself and you will see that it will cost you less than change cad, implement it, do the training (hopefully) and remodel everything from scratch to then find you with a cad that does the same things of the other and if it is slow in a certain function then it is faster in that sellers- all :smile:

 

[Be_on_edge]

true, these solid edge psms are a great break, unless it is possible to pass from a par to a psm to things done, I have to ask [MENTION=240]be_on_edge[/MENTION]

Yes, you can turn a part into sheetmetal (converts into sheetmetal synchronous and then save by name).

My opinion is still opposite. from the file extension you know a priori if it is a sheet rather than a part without even having to open it.
I do not understand what is the uncomfortableness of having 2 different extensions as you have shown.

Hi.

 

[Be_on_edge]

Yes, I read, but it is a post of 2010 and little specific; I am not interested in propaganda (and as we know many on the forum yes); I care to put on a sheet of white paper the +sw -se and +se -sw commands.
many commands/functions I mentioned on if they do not exist. while others that are quoted, on sw they provide a fewer clicks.
we start from the first:
- copy with couplings
on sw: you have the function together with those on the bar; you can choose whether to replace the elements open on sw or search through the various directors.
where is the command? How do you proceed?
to you the answer.
I am trying to be objective and to create a useful post to those who do not know both systems in depth. no matter being experienced users; many on the forum have used autocad 2d until yesterday or have used only one 3d system for years. It is not a post to know "who has it longer." you have a lot of knowledge about yourself and you can provide your important technical opinion.
I think it's a good idea, don't you think?

I'm sorry if I allow myself, I understand that a certain choice has been made and now it's defense, but it seems to me that the propaganda is doing it yourself.

My idea is that you have a superficial solid edge knowledge and is evident from the list you have compiled.

I recommend a nice thorough course of solidworks otherwise in a few years we will see you pass to inventor.

the real difference is made by the implementation of a software in its business flow

Hi.

 

[cacciatorino]

Yes, you can turn a part into sheetmetal (converts into sheetmetal synchronous and then save by name).

My opinion is still opposite. from the file extension you know a priori if it is a sheet rather than a part without even having to open it.
I do not understand what is the uncomfortableness of having 2 different extensions as you have shown.

Hi.

It's convenient that you don't have to think about what's going to be done in sheet metal and what's wrong. Perhaps it happens that a bracket that you would have obtained from a profile to l then the customer the volgia made from sheet cut to laser and bent. not to distinguish between par and psm simplifies this management, otherwise if I'm not mistaken solid edge is the only cad that does so then when you're one against 99 it's likely that the other 99.... :wink:

 

[Be_on_edge]

It's convenient that you don't have to think about what's going to be done in sheet metal and what's wrong. Perhaps it happens that a bracket that you would have obtained from a profile to l then the customer the volgia made from sheet cut to laser and bent.

I happened to realize a lifting platform where only to almost finished project I was asked to introduce folded plates instead of welded plates.
through the command "pass a sheet metal" and "transform in sheet" I got the pieces that I needed and continued to work in part on par file (without having to save in psm).

not to distinguish between par and psm simplifies this management, otherwise if I'm not mistaken solid edge is the only cad that does so then when you're one against 99 it's likely that the other 99.... :wink:

to choose whether to distinguish between par and psm or to work only with par how it can be wrong?
In previous conversations we complain that solidedge does a lot less and how much more does one do it?

 

[cacciatorino]

In previous conversations we complain that solidedge does a lot less and how much more does one do it?

not knowing that it was possible to pass without wounding from sheet to side, it seemed to me that you should choose a priori. However I prefer to have only one car that does everything, rather than having to choose every morning if to go out with the point or with the panda depending on the program of the day:finger:

 

[marcof]

not knowing that it was possible to pass without wounding from sheet to side, it seemed to me that you should choose a priori. However I prefer to have only one car that does everything, rather than having to choose every morning if to go out with the point or with the panda depending on the program of the day:finger:

Your comparison with the car is improper because it assumes that to change it you have to go home.
I propose a comparison with clothing: in the morning you go out in gymnastics suit and then you have to go to a working meeting in which case you just enter a phone booth and get out dressed in a jacket and tie (or as superman, as you prefer) :biggrin:
There's only one wishing to find her, the phone booth. :smile:

 

[Be_on_edge]

Your comparison with the car is improper because it assumes that to change it you have to go home.
I propose a comparison with clothing: in the morning you go out in gymnastics suit and then you have to go to a working meeting in which case you just enter a phone booth and get out dressed in a jacket and tie (or as superman, as you prefer) :biggrin:
There's only one wishing to find her, the phone booth. :smile:

: pigggrin:

 

[radio]

.... passing from a medium-range cad "with the red body" to a medium-range cad "with the blue wagon" ....

from my side would say "to pass from a donkey to a ciuco" (more or less)

....
business choices are well motivated and due to different factors. difficult to explain if not going down in the details... .

the problem that even in other similar discussions, appeared several times since I attend the forum, the motivations are always difficult to explain and no one ever does.
it is not to question your reasons but, as you will have noticed, to those of us most navigated and that in their career they have already experienced some change, they rizzano the hairs on the back when they hear say "cambiamo cad because for that function it takes half click", "we fall because the interface..." etc...

...
the choice is not due to the commercial that passed by chance (I don't know how to think of such a consideration...).
....

right, he didn't pass by chance, that's the king of commercials, he came there targeted. :biggrin: (you joke, eh).

we are ultra ot, but because at least this time it is worth it, I don't know if I understood myself...

 

[ipotemusa]

I agree with hunter, you don't know solid edge....... practically all the points you indicated there are similar also in solid edge.
I had to use solidworks for 9 very long months... and I really found very few positive things and a sea of negatives.... I did even 2 days course but nothing, I didn't go down. I don't know where you saw that he's taking a solidworks foot, it's the usual old fight, some companies go from one to another, and the commercials thwart him at 4 winds.
the boards that makes solid edge if you dream solidworks.
missing the synchronine (which I rarely use but when needed does miracles)
and a very long list... .
cmq good fun with the new program.

 

[vespa_83]

I don't know sw, but I think the difference in all programs is to know them thoroughly and use them for how they work.
Is French or German better? are different languages with grammar and logical construction of completely independent phrases, in translations it is not possible to make a comparison-translation word for word because they come out meaningless phrases, in the same way different programs are used differently to express a same form, a hole, an asola.
It's like you want to compare: word, notepad, libre office, google documents. If you want to get the most you can't expect to do everything with a program, but it's suitable for the tool you have, then the question becomes personal: dedication, deepening and demanding; there are those who will find themselves better with one, who with the other.
if the claims are low, the tool with fewer functions is usually faster to use, leaving the user the ability not to encounter errors and forgetfulness.

 

[cacciatorino]

We probably had to deal with a willing intern of some swx dealer, given the lack of knowledge of the products and disappearance when things got a little bad :d

 

[radio]

We probably had to deal with a willing intern of some swx dealer, given the lack of knowledge of the products and disappearance when things got a little bad :d

You probably got us.

 

[ese]

I happened to realize a lifting platform where only to almost finished project I was asked to introduce folded plates instead of welded plates.
through the command "pass a sheet metal" and "transform in sheet" I got the pieces that I needed and continued to work in part on par file (without having to save in psm).

small clarifications be_on_edge:
1-depends on the version of if
2-depends if you work in synchronous environment (by default).
for business choice, in the office we work (still) with the st4 and the environment ordered: so they are in the hunter condition for which it would be better to decide a priori if to make a particular in sheetmetal or in part.
the ordered environment, that of the st4 at least, does not allow to pass from part to sheetmetal, while starting with the synchronous part you can perform the passage.

 

[Be_on_edge]

small clarifications be_on_edge:
1-depends on the version of if

I do not remember in which version these commands were introduced and the st4 is now six years old.

for business choice from me you try to make the most of all the tools available, we do not use much synchronous but when needed it turns out very useful. usually old models and made with little criterion I switch them to synchronous without thinking too much.

Hi.

 

[ese]

I would like to exploit the synchronous because I consider it a much more fluid environment for the definition of the various components, but the business policies (= much more conservative than they see the "newness" of the synchronous as simple smoke in the eyes...) have decided differently.

Hi.

 

[Be_on_edge]

I would like to exploit the synchronous because I consider it a much more fluid environment for the definition of the various components, but the business policies (= much more conservative than they see the "newness" of the synchronous as simple smoke in the eyes...) have decided differently.

Hi.

I'm lucky to make these decisions. I'm sorry about your situation, maybe you could show the benefits on some of your models.
Surely a course in these situations helps a lot otherwise you have to wait for them to retire:wink:

Hi.

 

[-Mc-]

We probably had to deal with a willing intern of some swx dealer, given the lack of knowledge of the products and disappearance when things got a little bad :d

sw dealer? believe me, I would do without both sw and if; I did not want to be polemical and not even attack; the text never makes the idea of tones with which discussions are addressed on the forums; rather those who misinterpreted should ask themselves two questions about their system of communicating, especially because I have not insulted anyone and much less intend to do so.
He wanted to be a useful and constructive discussion, but apparently we can't. the theme is always turned on the failure of a person (in this case I).
I answer late because, unfortunately, I work and are often on the move.
probably, I have the most open mind of many of you starting from a party taken based on the software used. seems to read the classic alpha vs audi discussion (taking back automotive speech). the points I indicated, indicate lack of the command / greater speed of execution in terms of mouse click.
no one said that I am the expert of if or sw; I would not open a post, then to be the saputello professor.
the goal was to understand what has more/less sw/if, not to open a useless debate.
I realized that, on this theme, you do not want to go down specifically.

 

[-Mc-]

We probably had to deal with a willing intern of some swx dealer, given the lack of knowledge of the products and disappearance when things got a little bad :d

sw dealer? believe me, I would do without both sw and if; I did not want to be polemical and not even attack; the text never makes the idea of tones with which discussions are addressed on the forums; rather those who misinterpreted should ask themselves two questions about their system of communicating, especially because I have not insulted anyone and much less intend to do so.
He wanted to be a useful and constructive discussion, but apparently we can't. the theme is always turned on the failure of a person (in this case I).
I answer late because, unfortunately, I work and are often on the move.
probably, I have the most open mind of many of you starting from a party taken based on the software used. seems to read the classic alpha vs audi discussion (taking back automotive speech). the points I indicated, indicate lack of the command / greater speed of execution in terms of mouse click.
no one said that I am the expert of if or sw; I would not open a post, then to be the saputello professor.
the goal was to understand what has more/less sw/if, not to open a useless debate.
I realized that, on this theme, you do not want to go down specifically.

I had to use solidworks for 9 very long months... and I really found very few positive things and a sea of negatives.... .

I'm sorry, but this phrase makes me laugh, and I think it's the sun of the whole conversation