cat v5 some questions

[Utente NX]

I disapprove this quote, simply because while the other cads mentioned have a very similar comfiguration (as similar as to office) catia has its own graphical configuration that from my point of view is very refined and thought to those who have to work cad (an example on all wide graphic work area that is not reduced by a myriad menu)

apart from that I approve of the choice of some cads to look like office that I find optimized for common use commands.
That said, do you talk that you still have the menus in the working area that many times you have to move because they hinder the selection of objects?
The menus in the working area were born in 1995...make sure how long you are still.

 

[mcbramby]

Does it cost you more than a washing machine made by a company with 100 employees or 1000?
the cost of a cad is also linked to the company structure, as happens in the industrial metalmechanical one.

I don't understand where you're going... if I am an entrepreneur I hire 1000 people x that I sell many washing machines, and maybe better and I need + marketing controls etc. etc., I definitely not hire them to keep them.
so if I have a company with 1000 employees I presume to be + good of what has 100 ........................ I don't want to polemize...
as I said every cad has in pro and its cons.......
then if you want to tell me that maybe someone buys cat and spends 1000 but it would be enough solidworks that would cost 100 is another speech .:wink:

or that maybe slidworks is better than catia...... can be... :biggrin:

 

[www.cad-3d.net]

Boys, you took off your gloves and pulled your shirt sleeves. .

 

[mcbramby]

Boys, you took off your gloves and pulled your shirt sleeves. .

No... quiet normal discussions, now is like football:biggrin:

 

[SolidUser]

I don't understand where you're going... if I am an entrepreneur I hire 1000 people x that I sell many washing machines, and maybe better and I need + marketing controls etc. etc., I definitely not hire them to keep them.
so if I have a company with 1000 employees I presume to be + good of what has 100 ........................ I don't want to polemize...
as I said every cad has in pro and its cons.......
then if you want to tell me that maybe someone buys cat and spends 1000 but it would be enough solidworks that would cost 100 is another speech .:wink:

or that maybe slidworks is better than catia...... can be... :biggrin:

in a medium-large company the hidden business costs are much more substantial and therefore not to go into failure, the company must have a more expensive product to earn and survive.
Do you know the chain of a small or artisanal company compared to a medium-sized company?
Do you think the product is costing the same way?
in a company of 500 employees, how many rights can there be?
200?
do you make the company pay them 1200 euros per month, these that are not productive, will affect the final cost of the product?
a banal example, but it makes you understand the difference.


I do not consider a product better than another because it has class surfaces a or not.
catià as nx are considered of high bundles, not because they do things better (in fact), but because they cover all the cases of need of design.
often and willingly, cad born much before others, they carry behind non-optimal working methods and steps, which in recent years have revisited / improved or even removed.
solidworks that was born under another philosophy and concept, has a great workflow.
if I work in metalmechanics, I consider it the best, not only as the user stands in the use of commands, but for the available features and also as cost.

 

[mcbramby]

apart from that I approve of the choice of some cads to look like office that I find optimized for common use commands.
That said, do you talk that you still have the menus in the working area that many times you have to move because they hinder the selection of objects?
The menus in the working area were born in 1995...make sure how long you are still.

I am also allowed to disagree on this, personal opinion, because it comes from the version
v5 r1 to v5 r20 (present day) has always used the same icons and implemented commands
from one version to another there is no graphic but substantial modification .
with office (and programs "like") instead paint beautiful colorful icons
but in the various passages from one version to another I lost only time to reinterpret commands that did the same thing before but with the icon and the changed position, then if you want to say that it is less monotonous so with the new version I have to reinvent the menu positions or try to find out where they put or colored a command then I give you reason.
but if I have to be productive the new wreck must add to me things not to change the cards at the table and to confuse a designer......... then maybe I, you and many in the forum would succeed anyway but many would get lost in reinterpreting the commands and you would just waste time.

as I anticipated personal opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

[mcbramby]

I do not consider a product better than another because it has class surfaces a or not.
catià as nx are considered of high bundles, not because they do things better (in fact), but because they cover all the cases of need of design.
often and willingly, cad born much before others, they carry behind non-optimal working methods and steps, which in recent years have revisited / improved or even removed.
solidworks that was born under another philosophy and concept, has a great workflow.
if I work in metalmechanics, I consider it the best, not only as the user stands in the use of commands, but for the available features and also as cost.

If you say so...... All right, I don't know solidworks and I can't replicate
that certainly does things better than catia and others do not............... .

 

[The_Matrix]

in a medium-large company the hidden business costs are much more substantial and therefore not to go into failure, the company must have a more expensive product to earn and survive.
Do you know the chain of a small or artisanal company compared to a medium-sized company?
Do you think the product is costing the same way?
in a company of 500 employees, how many rights can there be?
200?
do you make the company pay them 1200 euros per month, these that are not productive, will affect the final cost of the product?
a banal example, but it makes you understand the difference.


I do not consider a product better than another because it has class surfaces a or not.
catià as nx are considered of high bundles, not because they do things better (in fact), but because they cover all the cases of need of design.
often and willingly, cad born much before others, they carry behind non-optimal working methods and steps, which in recent years have revisited / improved or even removed.
solidworks that was born under another philosophy and concept, has a great workflow.
if I work in metalmechanics, I consider it the best, not only as the user stands in the use of commands, but for the available features and also as cost.

there are many reasons why nx and catia cost more than other products.
one on all is the cost of r&d. (even those you mention are true, however).
think first of all that catia and nx have a core modeling proper that should be developed/maintained.

being then used in designing sophisticated things must cover the whole process, sometimes on aspects that affect very few other companies (electrical/electronic design, sophisticated composites, sophisticated caes, specialized package for automotive/aerospace) and also the "standard" part of the product has more advanced features than the mid-range (thinking surfaces... to certain aspects of top/down design... )
That doesn't mean a high is more powerful than a mid, indeed... on certain aspects of the product a mid is more productive.

What more the mids have than the highs are bullshit. Cosmetics... (for charity, important...). the beginning is:
- a high to close gaps with a mid puts us little (see nx8)
- a mid to close the gaps with a high simply can't... it doesn't have technology... He doesn't have the r&d. He doesn't have the money.

 

[Tequila]

there are many reasons why nx and catia cost more than other products.
one on all is the cost of r&d... cut ... a mid to close gaps with a high simply can't... has no technology... He doesn't have the r&d. He doesn't have the money.

quoto also because the midranges live with the high kernel, otherwise if they had to develop their kernel, the cost of the software would rise

 

[The_Matrix]

quoto also because the midranges live with the high kernel, otherwise if they had to develop their kernel, the cost of the software would rise

another reason is the "sale costs".
to quote our recent super-vittoria in daimler: you will not think that you will go... you make a demo to 4 users... climb to the first floor to bring the offer... the next day you take the order... It's not like that.
We've been investing since 2001. (only in the last year at least 20 fte). and at least we sold.
on other oem we have invested years (tanti!!) man for nothing.

 

[The_Matrix]

in a medium-large company the hidden business costs are much more substantial and therefore not to go into failure, the company must have a more expensive product to earn and survive.Do you know the chain of a small or artisanal company compared to a medium-sized company?
Do you think the product is costing the same way?
in a company of 500 employees, how many rights can there be?
200?
do you make the company pay them 1200 euros per month, these that are not productive, will affect the final cost of the product?
a banal example, but it makes you understand the difference.


I do not consider a product better than another because it has class surfaces a or not.
catià as nx are considered of high bundles, not because they do things better (in fact), but because they cover all the cases of need of design.
often and willingly, cad born much before others, they carry behind non-optimal working methods and steps, which in recent years have revisited / improved or even removed.
solidworks that was born under another philosophy and concept, has a great workflow.
if I work in metalmechanics, I consider it the best, not only as the user stands in the use of commands, but for the available features and also as cost.

I tell you for so many things, but not for what I have highlighted.
therefore, according to your reasoning:
- Should a ford cost more than one audi?
- Does a fiat cost more than a ferrari?
- a samsung tv has to cost more than a bang & oloufsen?
- a kg of barilla paste must cost more than one kg of a gragnano manufacturer?
mmhh... no fear

 

[RS4]

That's the opposite.
between all cad, catià is the least easy and intuitive.
the high cost is not an index of what you mentioned.
the high cost is due to 3 factors.
1) advanced features
2) corporate structure (how do you pay thousands of employees) if you do not sell it as uranium
3) Name

Who did I tell you that it is less intuitive than everyone on what basis? ? ?

advanced features you noticed:biggrin: we talk about 30 years of automotive aerospace development costum with titanium aluminum materials and composite of the whole product life cycle.. more than 140 dassault modules and many other external ones from official partners .... specialized for aviation composite both as cad solutions that cam everything in a single solution i.e. catia v5 I want to remind you developed first by boeing in collaboration with dassault

catià v5 has the ugliest interface between all cad.
I only attach an image.
How much does the basic licence cost?
with all that costs, more professional icons?
They're not stupid.
think if in your home you would propose such an icon for an interface of your product, what your dt or colleagues might think.
and should I pay you 1500 euros a month?

the curve of draining of catiah is the lowest in absolute.

what makes faith are the statistics on this forum.
There are hundreds and hundreds of neophytes or students who start using sw without courses and cubes and asses manage to do them.

ask to make cubes and assemble from scratch with catiah v5 and see if they succeed.

I don't speak for party taken, but the truth is right here, on the forum.

has an excellent all-screen interface!!! you have the opportunity to move the icons where you want and create new ones!!!! without ever having visual problems in the working air, macros in will costumed for every need with the possibility to create also the icon with the mokamucca:finger:, steps from one module to another in an immediate way you can work hybrid and not, class surfaces with excellent fast computing capabilities even more complex

continues to make cubes in the sketch quickly with solid works, than to the rest of the automotive aerospace ..... specialist thinks catia pro/e and nx


I attach my icons see if you like most custom

greetings

 

[RS4]

there are many reasons why nx and catia cost more than other products.
one on all is the cost of r&d. (even those you mention are true, however).
think first of all that catia and nx have a core modeling proper that should be developed/maintained.

being then used in designing sophisticated things must cover the whole process, sometimes on aspects that affect very few other companies (electrical/electronic design, sophisticated composites, sophisticated caes, specialized package for automotive/aerospace) and also the "standard" part of the product has more advanced features than the mid-range (thinking surfaces... to certain aspects of top/down design... )
That doesn't mean a high is more powerful than a mid, indeed... on certain aspects of the product a mid is more productive.

What more the mids have than the highs are bullshit. Cosmetics... (for charity, important...). the beginning is:
- a high to close gaps with a mid puts us little (see nx8)
- a mid to close the gaps with a high simply can't... it doesn't have technology... He doesn't have the r&d. He doesn't have the money.

I agree with what you say matrix I hope I understand it once and for good reason:biggrin:

Hi.
♪

 

[RS4]

apart from that I approve of the choice of some cads to look like office that I find optimized for common use commands.
That said, do you talk that you still have the menus in the working area that many times you have to move because they hinder the selection of objects?
The menus in the working area were born in 1995...make sure how long you are still.

It is not said that the menus you have them in the working area but you can move them wherever you want without going into options but directly with the mouse or block them like other cads in the frame.. around but from the usernx so it is very flexible in this way I always found it well I assure you


Hi.

♪

 

[The_Matrix]

Who did I tell you that it is less intuitive than everyone on what basis? ? ?

advanced features you noticed:biggrin: we talk about 30 years of automotive aerospace development costum with titanium aluminum materials and composite of the whole product life cycle.. more than 140 dassault modules and many other external ones from official partners .... specialized for aviation composite both as cad solutions that cam everything in a single solution i.e. catia v5 I want to remind you developed first by boeing in collaboration with dassault




has an excellent all-screen interface!!! you have the opportunity to move the icons where you want and create new ones!!!! without ever having visual problems in the working air, macros in will costumed for every need with the possibility to create also the icon with the mokamucca:finger:, steps from one module to another in an immediate way you can work hybrid and not, class surfaces with excellent fast computing capabilities even more complex

continues to make cubes in the sketch quickly with solid works, than to the rest of the automotive aerospace ..... specialist thinks catia pro/e and nx


I attach my icons see if you like most custom

greetings

I have a different view from the "coron".
the ease of use is made of many aspects:
discoverability: the ability of a user to find the suitable command without too much help (catea and nx are good both)
repeatibility: the ability of a software to have a "homogeneous" behavior (and here catia is definitely later)
efficiency: the ability of a user interface to adapt to experienced user as to a user "basic" (and here, imho, nx is later)

then there is a fundamental aspect on the "easy" of use... that you will understand well... others don't.
if you have to make a part of a minimally complex model... that I know, a closure of a surface where 5/6 surfaces arrive. . (but we could think of swept with particular shapes or variant patterns or other than the usual platelets and cabbage stems of cubes) cat and nx have a nside function that is a power, so to say... What do you care if it has such an interface or something??? apply it, closes the hole with a 6-side patch in curvature and...
with swx/se/inventor you have to pull curves in the middle of the "hole"... put n surfaces... Try to keep them at least in bribe... A hard work.
Who cares if they have multicolor icons or curtains that don't occupy the graphic area? 10 times the time... You're struggling with the blind man... would this be ease of use?

 

[flaviobrio88]

if you have to make a part of a minimally complex model... that I know, a closure of a surface where 5/6 surfaces arrive. . (but we could think of swept with particular shapes or variant patterns or other than the usual platelets and cabbage stems of cubes) cat and nx have a nside function that is a power, so to say... What do you care if it has such an interface or something??? apply it, closes the hole with a 6-side patch in curvature and...

depends on:

If it's a normal closure, it's okay, but if it's part of a car window zone then it's no good because you have to first have a tangency edge extension for at least 5/7 mm to allow the cutting blades to reach the extension and then you can close.
and who I know we can only do it (omnicad)

 

[RS4]

depends on:

If it's a normal closure, it's okay, but if it's part of a car window zone then it's no good because you have to first have a tangency edge extension for at least 5/7 mm to allow the cutting blades to reach the extension and then you can close.
and who I know we can only do it (omnicad)

Hello flavio

post something if you have the chance we try:biggrin:

 

[flaviobrio88]

Hello flavio

post something if you have the chance we try:biggrin:

You want to hurt yourself?
There are no problems for me:

 

[RS4]

You want to hurt yourself?
There are no problems for me:

something simple for you I say!!!! definitely hard for us:biggrin:

not the opposite I recommend flavio

 

[The_Matrix]

depends on:
If it's a normal closure it's okay, but if it's part of a car window zone then it's no good because you need to first have a tangency edge extension for at least 5/7 mm to allow the cutting blades to reach the extension and then you can close.and who I know can do it only us (omnicad)

the "normal closures" are robe from catia or nx... If you have to do it with swx or sw or inv I want to see you.

in fact cost more than catia or nx.