prices licensed 4.0

[gfx]

I should change my very old inventor 2010 ... I am accustomed to assembling parts to realize even complex mechanisms on solid parts and on sheet metal. lately you draw several robots.... we are introducing the 3d printing in company so that we seemed to create 4.0 (see the advertising arrived) was a good substitute.

are we going to the right product or someone not recommend it for this kind of design?

What should you expect to spend (100 € + or less) to have create 4.0 with the features we are used to using + those related to 3d printing?

greetings
♪

 

[320i S]

hi, part 3d I turns out to be already implemented in the basic license, surely there are additional packages, but my advice is before reconfigure the working method until now used and then expand.

I also do a bit of robotics, the already basic creo mechanism part, is very complete, with the advanced dynamics you can analyze even better the functions of the mechanism.
compared to solidwork (species in the 2010 version) is another planet, creo is more comparable to catia and unigraphics, than to solidworks, inventor or solid edge, because it has so many more possibilities.
already the fact that you can assemble maths of other cad natively and not passing through a generic format (step or igs) should make you understand with what cad you have to do.

if you are accustomed to working with external maths on which to create or extrapolate geometric data, good would be to have the avanced assembly license, which allows a very fast and very flexible top-down design.

with the ptc you will have 2 possibilities of licenses, those "proprietaries" (you pay once and don't think about it anymore) and with maintenance aside, or to rent: you pay a tot per year (always), but you understand the licenses in use and maintenance, plus you can also decide for a given period, to add a package or full license and then leave what you do not use anymore.
This considerably lowers startup costs and if you have multiple cad stations, it can be very interesting (see that it is software fired annually and not "one-time").

In my opinion, overcoming the implementation phase, the benefits are enormous, especially considering that the immediate future is going towards the enrichment of data that will be the technical office to have to provide (this without even having to undo "industry 4.0"

 

[gfx]

but my advice is before reconfigure the working method now used and then expand

What do you mean?

said this, mathematicians are derived from paper, biro/matita pen and some gray matter that very often in modern industries is delegated to all kinds of software ..... here we work on voice commands and vision systems for movements in space 3d .... but we still consume a lot of paper....
all marketing/fume that is moving around the name "industry 4.0" is very helpful to me ... especially to understand what customers will succeed in the future and what they cannot have (in summary a new method to distinguish between man and somaro).

Now I think my design concept has been clarified better. Sorry if the answer is a bit scratching ... but it seemed to me the answer of a seller ... I hoped to have the opinion of a colleague .... even if colleague is a big word because I think I am a designer in bands with everything to learn.

I would like your clarification on your sentence that I carry over, because it aroused my interest.

I know, however, that I still don't know anything about costs, either full license or rental .... .

Thanks for everything
♪

 

[320i S]

I go for points:

- every time you install a new cad, or you switch to a much more advanced version, you need a reconfiguration activity of the design standards, in some cases, they must be remade from zero, because the previous standards (starting file, formats, symbols or other), can not be compatible with the new interfaces/commands, think that you just install: ready-via-designs and produces, does not correspond to the reality of the facts, precisely because these software give a very high level of customization

- at the price level, I am not able to, I think other users of this forum, to give you reliable prices of purchase licenses, because it goes behind a negotiation and the prices vary very much according to the number of cad stations, to the license packages to match, maintenance etc.; to ask a dealer is the best solution

- Industry 4.0 that brings innovation or not in the way of working, it is almost certain that it will push to exchange more and more readable data directly from the machines or however with little intervention by an operator; in this the technical office that creates this data, will have more and more a fundamental role

- Giving you a "connect" opinion without seeing and touching your method of work, it would have been a much more "false" way than being on the generic "like a seller".

 

[gfx]

I go for points:

- every time you install a new cad, or you switch to a much more advanced version, you need a reconfiguration activity of the design standards, in some cases, they must be remade from zero, because the previous standards (starting file, formats, symbols or other), can not be compatible with the new interfaces/commands, think that you just install: ready-via-designs and produces, does not correspond to the reality of the facts, precisely because these software give a very high level of customization

I took this for granted...

for Industry 4.0 .... I think what you say about it confirms what I said... i.e., in summary, Industry 4.0 is just an empty shell, a word invented by marketing to explain something that you do not know but that they see works very well to sell a little more smoke and much less roasted ... you do not need to use this word to justify a sale... is countercurrent to the real world you have not seen that the world full of content is literally overwhelming that empty of content? Is it not time to change course?

we have done so and to customers we explain that apart from saying "our software and machines are at the pace with industry 4.0", we tell them that we are developing voice commands and that the competitors industry 4.0 are far, we tell them that our systems interface on every kind of connection, wifi, bluetooth, cable, bus and that they can have remote controls from all kinds of pcs or net, which very often competitors industry 4.0 are not.

I made you this romance because I think you might need it...

in any case respect the prices .... the good old man from to retired?

thanks anyway to the answer
♪

 

[cacciatorino]

for Industry 4.0 .... I think what you say about it confirms what I said... i.e., in summary, Industry 4.0 is just an empty shell, a word invented by marketing to explain something that you do not know but that they see works very well to sell a little more smoke and much less roasted ... you do not need to use this word to justify a sale... is countercurrent to the real world you have not seen that the world full of content is literally overwhelming that empty of content? Is it not time to change course?

the "industry 4.0" speech is important for the purpose of the so-called super amortization to 250% on instrumental goods. In this category, software is not included if bought by itself, but they are part of it if purchased together with a machine (e.g., the soft cam purchased together with the working center). You should see if you can get the soft back inside a purchase like that. on the net are the tables of super-ammortisable goods, but a chatter with the accountant I think is highly recommended.

in any case respect the prices .... the good old man from to retired?

I think the basic license is on the 6000 + 1500/2000 annual update, but I might be wrong either because I have no updated info or because in the negotiation the commercials have a lot of margin to lower the demands. usually pro/e costs like other purchases and a little more as maintenance. then to read here on the forum the historical users of pro/e always say that the training courses are practically obligatory to leave, something instead not necessary with other soft more modern like the various solid [Bleep]*, and this should be seen as an additional cost to endure. then you have to see what gives you basic license: I use cocreate (currently I believe direct/modeling) and if you have to work in so many users it is practically mandatory the use of pdm, which is not necessary with the various solid [Bleep]*, and so those are other money that go away. then also the initial configurations: cocreate requires mandatory presence of a technician installer also for simple tasks such as creating a self-compiling cartilage and therefore those are other costs, which with the various solids [Bleep] an averagely awake user does alone. I'm not saying that I create pros and suffers from these problems, simply because I don't know him, but I'm just giving you a "warning" about something that the seller will definitely not tell you, and so you have to evaluate before signing the license order.

I ask you a question, not knowing inventor: have you already evaluated and discarded the update to the current version? While on the same program you would have the advantage of file compatibility and already know the working environment, and perhaps in the meantime the program filled the gaps you want to replace.

 

[calacc]

then to read here' on the forum the historical users of pro/e always say that the training courses are practically mandatory to start

I am not historical user pro/e, I started in 2012 with creo 1.0 not doing training. I used e-learning libraries that eventually are very well-made video courses (not simple tutorials because they are much more structured). I recommend them for those who want to start because I found myself well.

 

[gfx]

[MENTION=38]hunter[/MENTION] ... we bhe the industry 4.0 speech is important for our customers, for the fiscal aspect from 2016 to today in Italy .... but my speech was about everything else.

for the rest we talk about €3500 annual and about €8000 perpetua (I had a phone call now from the contact center). Obviously the additional costs you talk about will fill all possible discounts when negotiating in the most fortunate case.

As for inventor... last year we tried to make a free demo.... and sought is the right word.... Turns out the processor a6 and the miserable video card didn't make us easy ... but the test was just for that .... How much chance is it stacking when we have thousands of details on screen to form a machine? ?
the answer always gives us an undersized processor.... if the pgr also turns with a suede of cpu then the program is unwavering .... otherwise.... trouble in sight.
This is no less I find that along with solid [Bleep] is still a valid program if you don't have to build things like molds or printed ... it is true that our version and versions of solid [Bleep] that I have seen around show the side with certain dimensions of projects.

greetings
♪

 

[gfx]

I am not historical user pro/e, I started in 2012 with creo 1.0 not doing training. I used e-learning libraries that eventually are very well-made video courses (not simple tutorials because they are much more structured). I recommend them for those who want to start because I found myself well.

all very nice ... but if you need a course to use a cad (I'm talking as a programmer and user cad starting from autocad9) .... ok if you just got out of school/university and if your job interests you but also not .... but in all other cases at least it means that the help of the program is written with the feet.

greetings
♪

 

[320i S]

I took this for granted...

for Industry 4.0 .... I think what you say about it confirms what I said... i.e., in summary, Industry 4.0 is just an empty shell, a word invented by marketing to explain something that you do not know but that they see works very well to sell a little more smoke and much less roasted ... you do not need to use this word to justify a sale... is countercurrent to the real world you have not seen that the world full of content is literally overwhelming that empty of content? Is it not time to change course?

we have done so and to customers we explain that apart from saying "our software and machines are at the pace with industry 4.0", we tell them that we are developing voice commands and that the competitors industry 4.0 are far, we tell them that our systems interface on every kind of connection, wifi, bluetooth, cable, bus and that they can have remote controls from all kinds of pcs or net, which very often competitors industry 4.0 are not.

I made you this romance because I think you might need it...

in any case respect the prices .... the good old man from to retired?

thanks anyway to the answer
♪

more than discounted the passage to a new cad, it is normally heavily underestimated, especially if the previous cad is more used as an electronic tecnigraph.

Industry 4.0 I do not see it as an empty shell, it will lead to use new standards and different ways you work even to those who dare to stay at "3.0".
Now we are still at the beginning, everyone says they are ready, few are seriously "already on the piece", and the examples I have seen so far (then, I repeat), do not joke at all.
If you think about it, that's what they said about the internet. . .

 

[320i S]

[MENTION=38]hunter[/MENTION] ... we bhe the industry 4.0 speech is important for our customers, for the fiscal aspect from 2016 to today in Italy .... but my speech was about everything else.

for the rest we talk about €3500 annual and about €8000 perpetua (I had a phone call now from the contact center). Obviously the additional costs you talk about will fill all possible discounts when negotiating in the most fortunate case.

As for inventor... last year we tried to make a free demo.... and sought is the right word.... Turns out the processor a6 and the miserable video card didn't make us easy ... but the test was just for that .... How much chance is it stacking when we have thousands of details on screen to form a machine? ?
the answer always gives us an undersized processor.... if the pgr also turns with a suede of cpu then the program is unwavering .... otherwise.... trouble in sight.
This is no less I find that along with solid [Bleep] is still a valid program if you don't have to build things like molds or printed ... it is true that our version and versions of solid [Bleep] that I have seen around show the side with certain dimensions of projects.

greetings
♪

Here, the prices I had in my hand not long ago, were different, of course, we do not talk about double or half, and it was all related to the composition of the licenses.

discourse complexity of the assemblies, I create has a lot of possibilities to lighten the visualization and make life easier to the graphics card, already only the appearance of the "simplified representations", is a span over what makes available a cad like cat v6, but there are other features.

the pdm I think it is now an almost obligatory tool for a technical office with at least 4-5 designers, even if you work exclusively on a contract, lightening much all the management of a project and the entire database.

just a note: who says that I create goes well mainly for moldists & co., has no idea of the real potential of this cad, and just see the references of ptc to today, you have no clients like catterpillar, jhon deere and other similar, because they have proposed before other software houses.

 

[calacc]

but in all other cases at least it means that the help of the program is written with feet

look, the help of the program is done just as well according to me (and wanting you can do even with that). the e-learning I was talking about has the advantage of being more intuitive as a setting because it is based on videos and modules where the step-by-step procedures are illustrated. I use both the help and e-learning. see it like this to make a comparison: for a writer the help is like the dictionary while e-learning is like a good grammar book.

 

[320i S]

all very nice ... but if you need a course to use a cad (I'm talking as a programmer and user cad starting from autocad9) .... ok if you just got out of school/university and if your job interests you but also not .... but in all other cases at least it means that the help of the program is written with the feet.

greetings
♪

creo's help, as it is very vast, has very few practical examples, becomes extremely useful when you are familiar with the program and especially on the most used terms.
personally today I can say that 60-70% at least of my knowledge about creo, I learned them thanks to the help; the courses I did in 2001-2002, when it was another program practically.

 

[cacciatorino]

As for inventor... last year we tried to make a free demo.... and sought is the right word.... Turns out the processor a6 and the miserable video card didn't make us easy ... but the test was just for that .... How much chance is it stacking when we have thousands of details on screen to form a machine? ?
the answer always gives us an undersized processor.... if the pgr also turns with a suede of cpu then the program is unwavering .... otherwise.... trouble in sight.
This is no less I find that along with solid [Bleep] is still a valid program if you don't have to build things like molds or printed ... it is true that our version and versions of solid [Bleep] that I have seen around show the side with certain dimensions of projects.

This is not said to be true: a modern software could take advantage of features (on hardware and driver level) not present on an old pc, for example graphic co-processor. so maybe on the old PC you see him clinging, and instead on a different car he could fly.

 

[gfx]

This is not said to be true: a modern software could take advantage of features (on hardware and driver level) not present on an old pc, for example graphic co-processor. so maybe on the old PC you see him clinging, and instead on a different car he could fly.

the processor a6 has a gpu ....

but in these days I plunged into the various cads (actually from the 2008 bid forest it passed to a few actors ... I would say really too few ...) I must say that they filled with a tide of utility for the most useless (and often derived from open hoibho projects) for those who were oriented to a few and monothematic projects (although very complex) .... reason why the cost .... I begin to understand the meaning of the gnuv3 licenses to which I had particular hostility.....

@320i (you like he ... and yet it is a car with engines that have had a lot of diamonds with a lot of details made in wool ... one of the first in this genre .... even if at least the merit of stylistic iconography must be summed up... nice reference to electronic tecnigraph was for a while that I did not feel it.... But think about it well... what else does a software cad need? ...

thanks to all ... for now I have solved my question ... I have not seen around a better cad than another, I have only seen ways to make the software better than others and different design styles ... from what I quickly noticed in these 3ggs is that now the various cads are equal ... in all directions .... reason why it is so worth taking artificial intelligence and installing the new inv**tor 2017.

someone also put down the sentence ... "they also said it about the internet" ... well I started using it just out .... I never used that phrase to chichessia and that it was a useful tool I have tried I have not hypothesized it or simulated it... but apparently with the new cad ... try it is no longer necessary .... (great laugh ... missing the icon in the forum menu)

greetings
♪

 

[gfx]

hoops... but how do you get solved on the title of the first post? ?

♪

 

[cacciatorino]

the processor a6 has a gpu ....

was just an example.... .
cmq seems to me to understand that more than a comparison I was looking to confirm your ideas. Good continuation!
- - - updated - - -

hoops... but how do you get solved on the title of the first post? ?

♪

you can't, after 15 minutes of sending, it's no longer possible to edit the posts.

 

[320i S]

This is not said to be true: a modern software could take advantage of features (on hardware and driver level) not present on an old pc, for example graphic co-processor. so maybe on the old PC you see him clinging, and instead on a different car he could fly.

true, especially if you talk about versions that are 5-6 years old.

 

[320i S]

@320i (you like he ... and yet it is a car with engines that have had a lot of diamonds with a lot of details made in wool ... one of the first in this genre .... even if at least the merit of stylistic iconography must be summed up... nice reference to electronic tecnigraph was for a while that I did not feel it.... But think about it well... what else does a software cad need? ...


greetings
♪

perhaps you did not understand what car recalls my nick, of 320i s there is only the e30 of 1988-1990 on mechanics m3 and30, perhaps one of the most reliable aspirers of history (also did endurance with this motor), with specific power greater than 100 cv/liter.

with a software cad of medium or high level today, talk only of the design as with a tecnigraph, exploits you and no 5% of the potential, even the simulative aspects are a part of what they are able to do and manage; automatically manage 100 % based, manual, spare parts service, industrialization, assembly, packaging, in short, 360 ° use within the company.

 

[gfx]

@ hunter .... to tell the truth I was just looking for what I asked ... if I had looked for a comparison I would put a different title. Don't you think?

@320i ok you remember you are right.... I was talking about all 320 from 2006 to 2012.

5% of potential, even simulative aspects are part of what they are able to do and manage; 100% automatic, manual, spare parts service, industrialization, assembly, packaging

I know very well what you mean, but if you look at it with the programmer's eye are all acessory features, from the very low cost of realization and often made without even spending a penny because based on open software structures ... what I wanted to emphasize is that compared to the revenues (and the very few competitors present today on the market demonstrate it: few competitors = mature market... hypotheses 1 in bankruptcy, hypotheses 2 so rich to allow companies to get themselves acquired without fear of losing jobs / earnings .... I believe that the cad discourse is part more of the hypothesis 2) the tangible offer (real value added and not of side added value) is the same since 2010 +/- only that in the meantime many utilities have been added that they call themselves "collateral" to the pure design and poor intrinsic value. in fact all additional utilities are easily realized via scripting .... I believe that the problem in this field was the buyer who decided to indulge the producers in adding economic value to parts of the product that really have very little. the result is that in a few years if you want to draw you will have to do it to your house because they will think about your pc and marketing.

the convenience of never getting out of the office to get dirty your hands a little overrated like saying....

I'm sorry but this is the future you have designed by choosing to pay too much a product that is worth very little. and you seem to insist on this suicide strategy.

What I suggest is to stop producing hooked up to a lan or software key licenses and use only safe or better closed lines and not to buy licensed software service .... they are all excuses to hack ia databases and make you work so you don't receive money but paying yourself the companies that make you work.

You think it's good? in certain fields of course (see google translate) ... in others much less ... if even bill gates proposed to charge taxes to the work of robots ....

greetings
♪