inventor vs catia

[crow2k75]

hello to all, I know that many to see this title will twist the nose and say that it is a little blasphemy......but I would like to understand what really differentiates them, personally I think that invent is a good cad 3d while cad is one of the best cads even if I never used it, so it is not a very objective judgment.
from the economic point of view inventor costs 7000 € while the basic package of catia 9000 €, moreover I believe that the two user interfaces are several different... or am I mistaken?
strength with comments:biggrin:
Good day

 

[space_developer]

the potential of caia is not comparable with that of inventor (swimmings of modules).
prices are variable anyway.
inventor is + immediate and simple but catia is + engineering - inventor is simplified.
then high-end programs copy each other.
Catia I see better in the group proe - nx - catia v5-v6

 

[space_developer]

What I don't understand, and here I open a bracket...
because they do not give to hire at an affordable price 200-500 € monthly software so as to allow to use a platform other than the usual one.
studies with - of 40 people are always monosoftware .....

 

[crow2k75]

the potential of caia is not comparable with that of inventor (swimmings of modules).
prices are variable anyway.
inventor is + immediate and simple but catia is + engineering - inventor is simplified.
then high-end programs copy each other.
Catia I see better in the group proe - nx - catia v5-v6

I fully agree with you that catia is part of the high-end cads.
what I would like to know is if when a madman (small / medium enterprise) who makes small crpentry and mechanical decides to switch to 3d, has more convenience to buy a cad type inventor or can he also evaluate high-end cads?

 

[Fulvio Romano]

as already mentioned in many other threads, in my opinion, if you need a solid modeling program, choosing between catia and inventor is quite equivalent (catia is worth a little more and costs a little more).
what has catia that inventor has not and will never, is the perfect integration with a vast ecosystem of software packages of the dassault that covers all the needs of development, from design to production planning, from the erp to the automatic drafting of the skeletons of the operating manuals.

if you do not use at least part of this ecosystem, you do not exploit all the potential of the package.

 

[Matteo]

I fully agree with you that catia is part of the high-end cads.
what I would like to know is if when a madman (small / medium enterprise) who makes small crpentry and mechanical decides to switch to 3d, has more convenience to buy a cad type inventor or can he also evaluate high-end cads?

catia is a very powerful cad, but you have to turn the business context to 360°. in my opinion the instrument is never an end but a means (excuse tautology :smile: ). if the company does not need to manage complex surfaces (aerospace, design, automotive, molds) or "scultoree" geometric continuity and gets a good treatment from a supplier (so not only a good price, but a good training, a good taste, a good advice for the choice and configuration of softeare and the management of technical information) why not choose inventor? indeed... currencies also solidworks and solidedge first and secondly also proe. other thing only serves a cad or you think of some additional module (fem, cfd, pdm, big assemblies, ...)? the choice also depends on the necessity of exchange in native format with customers/suppliers, in case of intensive exchange of different formats I would not exclude even an explicit like cocreate or sc (especially if the company comes from the "forma mentes" of autocad 2d).

 

[space_developer]

personally:
:
inventor
- great sketch not suitable for complex curves (which I believe is 1% of interest )
- simple and intuitive for cinematisms and verification also complex encumbrance with relative movements
- table setting (excellent and very simplified)

Cat
- sketch (almost perfect for me better than proe too)
-More modelling (best comparison of machining thanks to the dassault experience) but too based on sum and subtraction of volumes
-cinematisms module a great part but + complex to set
- assembly (optimum) with parts in combination of physical dimension (mbyte) very contained


:bekle:

defects are there but are compensable ....

 

[Edmond]

Excuse me, as a supporter of catia I feel I have to intervene, "space_developer" speaking of it writes:
-More modelling (best comparison of machining thanks to the dassault experience) but too based on sum and subtraction of volumesAre you sure you know him well? to me it does not seem that what you say is true, the solid modeler is rather simple as use, moreover, the presence of the Boolean functions is still of great utility, if it is to these that you refer to.
-cinematisms module a great part but + complex to setas above, a first cinematic study is done simply using the constraints of together, wanting to do more you go to the form of cinematics, but honestly I do not see where the difficulty is.
- assembly (optimum) with parts in combination of physical dimension (mbyte) very containedThis is what I understand less, at the beginning of v5 there were limits, today in the axiemi catia does not really fear rivals, the size of the files does not seem to have put in trouble, possibly use the "cache".

Finally, just for your information, look at what you can now rent.

 

[sampom]

- assembly (optimum) with parts in combination of physical dimension (mbyte) very containedThis is what I understand less, at the beginning of v5 there were limits, today in the axiemi catia does not really fear rivals, the size of the files does not seem to have put in trouble, possibly use the "cache".

Look that this was just listing him among the awards.
in fact says it is great and generates files of small size, and this is a great value. .
What did you get?

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[space_developer]

Are you sure you know him well? to me it does not seem that what you say is true, the solid modeler is rather simple as use, moreover, the presence of the Boolean functions is still of great utility, if it is to these that you refer to.
-cinematisms module a great part but + complex to setas above, a first cinematic study is done simply using the constraints of together, wanting to do more you go to the form of cinematics, but honestly I do not see where the difficulty is.
:tongue:

Finally, just for your information, look at what you can now rent.

:bekle:

1 I do not say utility I would like + feature that recalculate mechanical processing such as the "push" feature.

2 there are very + simple sw to use for identical results.

3 interesting... Do you have an idea about prices?

Hi.