matitarotta
Guest
Hello everyone,
Has anyone been able to prove it yet? How do you find yourself?
Has anyone been able to prove it yet? How do you find yourself?
ikki78
Guest
I'm downloading it now. but I read the readme.. and I am disappointed, hungry, bitter... on the sheet has not been done anything and the gap with software that I once considered competitors in this sector has now been reset and thinkdesign has been overtaken.. and very much... I gave confidence to the company even in worse times.. (diatribe poured etc...). but I think that the support contract for the year prossino we will not pay it and we will change system if a sp1 does not come out with updated and more performing sheet commands.. we started with thinkdesign 8.0 .... And I'm so sorry.
euro_ii
Guest
Hello,
as I have already written somewhere 2015, follows the positive trend that points to the stability of the product, and also to the improvement of the performance.
It is true that there are no new commands on the sheet, but they are working to improve the performance and functionality of the existing ones.
the part of the assemblies, with the new coupling engine, is very + usable, and also has new features ( gears). .
So from my point of view the version is positive ..
Hi.
Matteo
as I have already written somewhere 2015, follows the positive trend that points to the stability of the product, and also to the improvement of the performance.
It is true that there are no new commands on the sheet, but they are working to improve the performance and functionality of the existing ones.
the part of the assemblies, with the new coupling engine, is very + usable, and also has new features ( gears). .
So from my point of view the version is positive ..
Hi.
Matteo
matitarotta
Guest
hi ikki78, do you also use thinkteam? more or less how many files do you have?
ikki78
Guest
Hi, we have 4 licenses.. small structure.. no we do not use it.. currently. we work mainly on shop with drawings "use and throw".. You?
matitarotta
Guest
for us the speech is a little different. we have 16 modeling licenses and 9 of only two-dimensional. we use thinkteam and record any changes to files. we also work under vault.
SamaKruss
Guest
I am using 2014.1 and sincerely I have not seen significant improvements.
Although we talk about version 64, the speed is very similar to the 2009 version. There are no particularly innovative commands or functions, there are bugs not present previously (coaxial example with axial angle) the graphics are rather painful (it is necessary to move to high contrast themes to see something).
infinite options and sometimes unnecessarily separated (see section command) the poor opening power (step of 80mb, 12 min with think, 1.5 with creo 2.0, 2 and something with if) and the difficulty and little flexibility of positioning make this version delayed years compared to competitors.
also in 2015 are the same problems?
Fortunately thinkteam is still a worthy pdm/plm.
Although we talk about version 64, the speed is very similar to the 2009 version. There are no particularly innovative commands or functions, there are bugs not present previously (coaxial example with axial angle) the graphics are rather painful (it is necessary to move to high contrast themes to see something).
infinite options and sometimes unnecessarily separated (see section command) the poor opening power (step of 80mb, 12 min with think, 1.5 with creo 2.0, 2 and something with if) and the difficulty and little flexibility of positioning make this version delayed years compared to competitors.
also in 2015 are the same problems?
Fortunately thinkteam is still a worthy pdm/plm.
matitarotta
Guest
Hello samakruss,
I can't tell you if 2015 presents the same problems of 2014 because we still use the old 2012 superstable and reliable (since there was the tracollo we face the porting with the feet of lead 1). there are several features in 2015 that are interesting. I was also interested in having the Moldova design package that was available for professional licenses since 2014.
I agree with tteam but the merit goes to the var that with commitment and dedication (in my case I am followed by omniasolutions) , contribute to the operation and implementation of the system. sin that now is a product on which tk3 will no longer invest and therefore will be destined to die.
I can't tell you if 2015 presents the same problems of 2014 because we still use the old 2012 superstable and reliable (since there was the tracollo we face the porting with the feet of lead 1). there are several features in 2015 that are interesting. I was also interested in having the Moldova design package that was available for professional licenses since 2014.
I agree with tteam but the merit goes to the var that with commitment and dedication (in my case I am followed by omniasolutions) , contribute to the operation and implementation of the system. sin that now is a product on which tk3 will no longer invest and therefore will be destined to die.
Polymar
Guest
we recently installed the version 2015.2.119.20622 on computers in the office. while not noticing significant improvements, under win 7 now td it appears much more stable than previously. we hope that under the hands of dpt this product will recover time lost and introduce new features. and it would not be at all unpleasant an integration with hypermills as in the old days.
cacciatorino
Guest
Who's dpt? I haven't been following think3's evolution lately so I don't know anything about acquisitions and hand passages.
Polymar
Guest
Hello hunter. from what I know, dpt is a company that in Italy is based in bologna but heads a company with headquarters in france and that for several years has been operating in the cad/plm sector. among his names are matra dating, ptc and dassault systemes. for this I believe that for td they have "reopened the doors" and finally now we have a product made in italy that developed "at home" can really compete with other high brand brands. I am probably wrong, but I remain of the idea that if we want, here in our country we still have so much to give and above all the potential to push us very high. If there was an authentic brain escape, it doesn't mean that who's left is an idiot.. If only that integration between td and hm was reopened, then no doubt a future rose would be behind the door. I am tired of hearing Chinese cads, Indians, Germans, English, etc... let's go back to the race and the finish line is not so far.
cacciatorino
Guest
Hello, in the meantime, I went to google who this dpt is, among other things I saw on the think3 website that the company finally came out of the temporary exercise and started operating normally. I was afraid it was a spill bis!
from old customer gbg/t3 I hope they grow, even if the memories I have of when I was a client are not the best (more commercial than technical).
for the fact of staying in Italy I agree with you: of course it is that those who leave think only of his interest and not of the collectivity that has supported him until that moment, but I also understand that there may be emergency situations for which sometimes there is no other way out.
euro_ii
Guest
dpt is the new company that acquired the intellectual property of the software.
So in fact dpt is the new think3.
We hope that this will be stable and there are no other changes..
So in fact dpt is the new think3.
We hope that this will be stable and there are no other changes..
euro_ii
Guest
I'm usually very pro t3 because the product, I've seen it grow from version 6 and it's a product with many potentials.
but we are in Italy, and the way you try to do business is the same.. .
when I was in t3, there were many ideas and innovative projects, think that we were talking about cloud cad circe 10 years ago or more.. but who decides always commit the same mistakes ..
Polymar
Guest
here we finally arrived at 2016. some anticipations qui. it seems that however there are no big news apart from the addition of some commands that should have already been present years ago (like the multi flange ...). admitting that it is true, already the improvement of stability (= optimization of the code) would be really useful, since stability is a problem that concerns even more blasonized cad. from my needs, the only thing I wanted to see is the full integration with hypermill as in the release 2009.3, which has decreed the great worldwide success of td as cad/cam software. I do not understand that full integration has been achieved at such levels by swx and inventor, for this reason many cnc programmers continue to use hypercad, which cmq in its role is not bad at all but requires a relatively long time to be better managed in its potential.
Polymar
Guest
the interface has remained practically unchanged, but I trust in the most important fact that "the source code has been thoroughly revised so that the program has been made more robust and much more reliable" (what not recently...). a few commands have been added that you see the screen-shots. but certainly many will be ultra happy (including me) that from the help are accessible video resources and e-learning documents
Attachments
heterodyne
Guest
Hello everyone, my idea is that thinkdesign is a product out of every market logic and far ani lights from any competitor product, even of entry-level band.
It's as old as the macallan 12 years! who uses it should make a reason, look around and invest in a "modern" product with a geometric kernel that works as you must.
with td 2 times out of 3 fittings do not work and the same speech applies to shelling (basic solid modelling).
the first thing that I think should do in think3 and throw away the owner kernel (if necessary keep the part of gsm) and throw us into acis or parasolid (delcam doesn't seem to have made a mistake in this sense).
I can't believe
It's as old as the macallan 12 years! who uses it should make a reason, look around and invest in a "modern" product with a geometric kernel that works as you must.
with td 2 times out of 3 fittings do not work and the same speech applies to shelling (basic solid modelling).
the first thing that I think should do in think3 and throw away the owner kernel (if necessary keep the part of gsm) and throw us into acis or parasolid (delcam doesn't seem to have made a mistake in this sense).
I can't believe
Polymar
Guest
hi, while remaining that everyone can have their own free opinion, it is obvious that:
1- you do not know in depth and even minimally the intrinsic potential of td, that other cad much more blasoned do not even dream (the usual solidxxx I have sadly used them as well as I for several years ... all time lost).
2- the logic of market to an end-user as I do not care for anything, the important thing is that it does well and quickly the tasks of my job (the cad is an investment, not a perditempo)
3- "never from any competitor" product?!??? If you are a reseller, then by definition technically you are neither reliable nor reliable.
4-old?!?!? td was born with a new and perhaps revolutionary logic compared to other cads that today are consolidated but conceptually archaic
5- Do the fittings fail? At first, it happened to me, but then I went to do a geometry analysis and I realized that the operation was not mathematically possible. .. user fault... set the geometry, the shell worked perfectly.
post a step or iges that td can not empty but other competitors can. It's easy to talk, much less to prove what you say in the third person
6- td kernel, for your information, was the precursor of the hybrid system along with the current zw3d, once called varimetrix.
7. Throw in the old acis and parasolids?!? to become an identical copy of other commercials? who is oriented on td looks for something different from other products, which can somehow facilitate their work. ever try to import an iges or 20mb step with these engines? I take a lot of time and memory, as long as they get to it. td can do so in a few minutes, and can act on imported geometries almost as if they were native and in all cases very easily
8- You admitted it too, gsm is a revolutionary concept that only some cads that cost many more $$ have tried to implement but with little success. So, do you think programmers so skillful in imagining gsm then ca55ate into writing the kernel?!? ! ?
9- "delcam did not wrong" ... in fact it was bought by autodesk, so something did not go in the right direction!!! their only really competitive product is the powermill that however has shown some weaknesses reported several times by users but never resolved
10- Finally, td continues to remain a product of native Italian conception and that says it all. If you tell me that the commercial system (you are a reseller, no?!) has been bankrupt, then I give you reason. but technically speaking, for me it is placed in the medium-high segment comparable to the flagship product of other companies much more competitive and established on the market, but they obviously have more substantial capital and human resources.
but apart from everything, a post like your does not improve the quality of the forum, it is not constructive at all for users, but it only makes this forum more commercial and less technical. "imho" is not an excuse, if you know the things you say, then well come. but giving vague and "useless" judgments does not serve anyone.
1- you do not know in depth and even minimally the intrinsic potential of td, that other cad much more blasoned do not even dream (the usual solidxxx I have sadly used them as well as I for several years ... all time lost).
2- the logic of market to an end-user as I do not care for anything, the important thing is that it does well and quickly the tasks of my job (the cad is an investment, not a perditempo)
3- "never from any competitor" product?!??? If you are a reseller, then by definition technically you are neither reliable nor reliable.
4-old?!?!? td was born with a new and perhaps revolutionary logic compared to other cads that today are consolidated but conceptually archaic
5- Do the fittings fail? At first, it happened to me, but then I went to do a geometry analysis and I realized that the operation was not mathematically possible. .. user fault... set the geometry, the shell worked perfectly.
post a step or iges that td can not empty but other competitors can. It's easy to talk, much less to prove what you say in the third person
6- td kernel, for your information, was the precursor of the hybrid system along with the current zw3d, once called varimetrix.
7. Throw in the old acis and parasolids?!? to become an identical copy of other commercials? who is oriented on td looks for something different from other products, which can somehow facilitate their work. ever try to import an iges or 20mb step with these engines? I take a lot of time and memory, as long as they get to it. td can do so in a few minutes, and can act on imported geometries almost as if they were native and in all cases very easily
8- You admitted it too, gsm is a revolutionary concept that only some cads that cost many more $$ have tried to implement but with little success. So, do you think programmers so skillful in imagining gsm then ca55ate into writing the kernel?!? ! ?
9- "delcam did not wrong" ... in fact it was bought by autodesk, so something did not go in the right direction!!! their only really competitive product is the powermill that however has shown some weaknesses reported several times by users but never resolved
10- Finally, td continues to remain a product of native Italian conception and that says it all. If you tell me that the commercial system (you are a reseller, no?!) has been bankrupt, then I give you reason. but technically speaking, for me it is placed in the medium-high segment comparable to the flagship product of other companies much more competitive and established on the market, but they obviously have more substantial capital and human resources.
but apart from everything, a post like your does not improve the quality of the forum, it is not constructive at all for users, but it only makes this forum more commercial and less technical. "imho" is not an excuse, if you know the things you say, then well come. but giving vague and "useless" judgments does not serve anyone.
heterodyne
Guest
you do to write, do not take it too much and try to stay detached; after all and a software.
the potentialities of td I know him at 100%'; I started putting hands on that kernel at eurekagold times, we talk about 1997 or more of them.
I also bought a license in its time so I can say a lot about the product; I am not a dealer and/or kisser of other competitors.
I was also betatester, for a certain period of time I must say, and so I saw preview some of the last functions.
subdivision and things like that I mean. Well, I can summarize everything in this concept. "To many beautiful ideas put them but for nothing finished", like all things in spirit t3.
interactive modeling, for example, born about in 2005 and remained a colabrodo, yes, if you have to manage clean geometries the tool works dignified but 90% of the files to use in direct modeling contain fittings and trimmed surfaces.
regarding the fittings I am sorry to contradict you but do not work as you must; are the cases that are not implemented well.
I finally reply to your comments
4- gsm apart (French dna, dassault, matra dating and beautiful company) I do not see where all this innovation is.
5 - the fittings fail and also great and not because of the user. in addition to this also the removal of the same by means of "direct modeling" fails. same thing for the displacement of features and/or recognition of fittings. and there are a tide of other things that would go magazines and put in order. it is worth that the software is better than the 2011-2012 version (transition period "versata")
6 - I do not think, because varimetrix/vx and a product born in the samsung house in 1985 or more of them and the kernel was already hybrid starting (I think it was called vx overdrive). Currently zw3d (ex vx) uses in addition some bees based on acis and, in any case, I can tell you that it reconnects to the great, immediately and rarely channel the fitting solutions. in thinkdesign even before pressing the ok button you have to pray that you have made the right sequence (if you like). if you want to sin then you have to make the connection manually; means exploding everything, menarsela with the tools of surfaces and recapture everything...
7 - it's true that Iges/steps well, but rhino does it pretty well, same speech for zw3d for example; However do not consider the fact that thinkdesign, at importing, does not make a good heling preventive while solidworks, nx and similar control the imported file in order to simplify its geometries... This causes more waiting times.
8 - gsm and a rather original deformation system but confined within the thinkdesign/hypercad universe. If you need to dialogue with external cads the data processed by gsm must be converted into nurbs quindo with all the cases of the case... and also gsm is subject to malfunction at the moment there are a package of software that used the same system but in nurbs environment (alias, nx and also solidworks). if you take a ride on the forum of omnicad you realize that gsm does not exist only for t3
9 - even ug was bought by siemens and it does not seem to me if you pass it wrong.
10 - resources and capital are not an excuse: zbrush developed a single person and looks at what became the software.
certainly think3 has made a saco of coglynate even at commercial level;
I therefore remain of the opinion that thinkdesign today and an overtaken product.
the potentialities of td I know him at 100%'; I started putting hands on that kernel at eurekagold times, we talk about 1997 or more of them.
I also bought a license in its time so I can say a lot about the product; I am not a dealer and/or kisser of other competitors.
I was also betatester, for a certain period of time I must say, and so I saw preview some of the last functions.
subdivision and things like that I mean. Well, I can summarize everything in this concept. "To many beautiful ideas put them but for nothing finished", like all things in spirit t3.
interactive modeling, for example, born about in 2005 and remained a colabrodo, yes, if you have to manage clean geometries the tool works dignified but 90% of the files to use in direct modeling contain fittings and trimmed surfaces.
regarding the fittings I am sorry to contradict you but do not work as you must; are the cases that are not implemented well.
I finally reply to your comments
4- gsm apart (French dna, dassault, matra dating and beautiful company) I do not see where all this innovation is.
5 - the fittings fail and also great and not because of the user. in addition to this also the removal of the same by means of "direct modeling" fails. same thing for the displacement of features and/or recognition of fittings. and there are a tide of other things that would go magazines and put in order. it is worth that the software is better than the 2011-2012 version (transition period "versata")
6 - I do not think, because varimetrix/vx and a product born in the samsung house in 1985 or more of them and the kernel was already hybrid starting (I think it was called vx overdrive). Currently zw3d (ex vx) uses in addition some bees based on acis and, in any case, I can tell you that it reconnects to the great, immediately and rarely channel the fitting solutions. in thinkdesign even before pressing the ok button you have to pray that you have made the right sequence (if you like). if you want to sin then you have to make the connection manually; means exploding everything, menarsela with the tools of surfaces and recapture everything...
7 - it's true that Iges/steps well, but rhino does it pretty well, same speech for zw3d for example; However do not consider the fact that thinkdesign, at importing, does not make a good heling preventive while solidworks, nx and similar control the imported file in order to simplify its geometries... This causes more waiting times.
8 - gsm and a rather original deformation system but confined within the thinkdesign/hypercad universe. If you need to dialogue with external cads the data processed by gsm must be converted into nurbs quindo with all the cases of the case... and also gsm is subject to malfunction at the moment there are a package of software that used the same system but in nurbs environment (alias, nx and also solidworks). if you take a ride on the forum of omnicad you realize that gsm does not exist only for t3
9 - even ug was bought by siemens and it does not seem to me if you pass it wrong.
10 - resources and capital are not an excuse: zbrush developed a single person and looks at what became the software.
certainly think3 has made a saco of coglynate even at commercial level;
I therefore remain of the opinion that thinkdesign today and an overtaken product.