#TraditionalCADsucks

owen_sparks

michael3424 said:

Did he get the job?

If not I hope you at least sent them a t-shirt 🤔

john_mcclary

Interesting... All I am doing is moving the component on the right over to the machine on the left.. What object could it possibly be creating.. lol stupid solidworks.

konstantin_shiriazdanov

john_mcclary said:

Interesting... All I am doing is moving the component on the right over to the machine on the left.. What object could it possibly be creating.. lol stupid solidworks.

parasolid has a limitations for geometry coordinates, it should lie in the range from -500 to 500 meters and when you trying to create object out of this bounds SW shows this message. so i can suppose that in this case he think that you have some object out of space bounds and doesn't allow to manipulate it

john_mcclary

Thing is I wasn't creating any part. Just dragging a part closer before I mate it.

Seems like SW was just doing random calcs in the background for no apparent reason.
Just pointing out how wacky SW can be from time to time. 

konstantin_shiriazdanov

john_mcclary said:

Seems like SW was just doing random calcs in the background for no apparent reason.

this is true, for some reason it always rebuilds your files. you open it, do nothing but it ask you to save file when you close it.

john_mcclary

konstantin_shiriazdanov said:

john_mcclary said:

Seems like SW was just doing random calcs in the background for no apparent reason.

this is true, for some reason it always rebuilds your files. you open it, do nothing but it ask you to save file when you close it.

I'm not sure it actually rebuilds files on save.. It is common around here to have the shop open a file in edrawings and it is literally one save out of date.
You need to to a ctrl+Q before save before it updates for some reason. At least when importing into mastercam or opening with eDrawings... Every time that happens I just say to them when they complain the part doesn't match the print. "You know that isn't an issue if you make it with Onshape.." 

owen_sparks

Just wanted to vent a similar frustration having taken Onshape for granted. 

I recently bought  a couple of company seats of a software package.

(1) Had to install it.  grrr.

(2) Keep closing it without saving anything.  Muppet, my bad, but its an easy habit to slip into.

(3) Went to share data between our users...  

Stumped. 
Google > Old forum post > Read help files > learn I need a "Hub"
Erm, OK, set up hub, now I have a shared file, at last we're done, yipeee. 
Not so fast, notice an email arrive congratulating me on my free 30-day trial of the hub.
WTF, I've bought multiple company seats and we have to pay to use them together?  I wonder how much?
$120!
A year!!
Per freakin' user!!!

Mindset = "You Scamming Ba$tards, you can shove that right up your..."

Onshape I promise not to take you for granted for at least the next 2 days.

Thanks for listening.

Owen S.

philip_thomas

Owen - I am only going to take a small amount of pleasure from your 'old cad' woes.
When we interview pro users, they almost all say "I wouldn't go back if you paid me!"

owen_sparks

philip_thomas said:

Owen - I am only going to take a small amount of pleasure from your 'old cad' woes.

I believe you should take more than that.

When I first saw OS I was sceptical, no installer, no local save, browsers, simple layout.  This simply isn't complicated enough to be real software, pfft, Kiddie-CAD.

Erm, WRONG, so very very wrong!

You folks should be extremely proud of what you've built, you're making the dinosaurs of the industry look a tad silly.

Owen S.

john_mcclary

problem is most engineers are "old school" and are very resistant to change. "New things are scary", or "I'm too (&@# lazy to learn new things"
Have to shovel it down some throats here for a couple years now, just to have them now starting to see "some" benefits no Onshape...

owen_sparks

john_mcclary said:

problem is most engineers are "old school" and are very resistant to change. "New things are scary", or "I'm too (&@# lazy to learn new things"
Have to shovel it down some throats here for a couple years now, just to have them now starting to see "some" benefits no Onshape...

Yeah, I agree, the senior voice tends to carry the most weight, but will also often be the most out of date.

john_mcclary

Stupid SolidWorks...
The Sketch for the slot is in the correct position, 3 hole pattern is in relation to the slot and also in the correct position...
But the actual extrude cut for the slot is some random position to the right...


Fighting this feature for half hour.. had another guy open it on his machine and fight with it...

Now it's worse..


All this could be avoided if they would all man up and just let me put this all in Onshape...
I'm on the second frame, have 15 more to go... gonna pull my hair out by the time I get back off SW..

At least I have a friend with me today

brucebartlett

 As long as this doesn't happen!

john_mcclary

Bruce! how could you!

brucebartlett

Sorry, I am just concerned your puss may be in danger with all those unstable, complicated in context assemblies. 

brucebartlett

And....whats the go with the floppy disc, it's not the 90's anymore?

john_mcclary

brucebartlett said:

And....whats the go with the floppy disc, it's not the 90's anymore?

That's my coffee coaster Got one at home too

john_mcclary

brucebartlett said:

Sorry, I am just concerned your puss may be in danger with all those unstable, complicated in context assemblies. 

Unstable is an understatement.... the only reason I'm doing incontext with SW is because I will have 10 or 15 (not sure yet) conveyors with different roller centers at random, so because each frame has 4 parts that all share the same roller cut out/bolt pattern, I did incontext to cut the editing down by 1/4... unfortunately I was coming off a few months of Onshape and forgot how utterly broken SW is with file references... I cringe every time I have to switch away from OS now... So used to parts studios just... working.. the first time... #spoiled 

owen_sparks

john_mcclary said:

Stupid SolidWorks...

At least I have a friend with me today

Awwwww.  Great friend!

I'd be on the phone to the purchasing department:- "Hello? I ordered a CAD-Mouse, and my order seems to have been screwed up again..."

Who is this friend?

OwS.

john_mcclary

Stella, she is the last of 3 babies that stray around my house, the other 2 disappeared (neighbor is assuming a predator picked them off, I think someone snatched them up hopefully) the other night and mama went looking for them. So we took her in until mama comes back, or someone else can keep her. Had to bring her to work because my other cats were too aggressive with her for me to leave alone yet.

owen_sparks

@john_mcclary, thanks for making the world a slightly better place

john_mcclary

https://youtu.be/B6WI6NuQPsY

Just look at how painful this $%!# is!
Now there are 2 of us on the project and by modifying the part on his machine, the incontext behavior has been broken to the point of re-draw... I want out of this old crapware damnit!

Update: 2 guys, 1-1/2 hours later, the assembly is behaving like it should... had to pack and go it twice. One mess-up and file references take crap, and are un-fixable.

I called all this out as being an possible issue in the kick-off meeting by choosing SW over Onshape... One manager is still on the fence about Onshape because he hasn't had much time with it. So we have to suffer... FML I could have been on the second conveyor line by now.. Arg

owen_sparks

Next scummy "Old CAD" business practice:-

I need a seat of a product from a certain orange themed purveyor of software.

No problem, it's a digital download and is $510 per year or £393 in UK currency. 

Unless you try to order it in the UK, in which case you're redirected to ".uk" not ".com" and the price changes from £393 to £588 per year for the same download.

This is on top of the boss saying they had no plans to change from perpetual licenses to subscriptions. I guess it's all in the question.  Perhaps users should have asked "Do you have a meeting this afternoon to formulate the plan to swap to a subscripton model?"

Well done Onshape, your transparency and integrity is leading the way.

Owen S. 

john_mcclary

Hey look, more WTF moments brought to you by Solidworks 2017...

So, I am replacing a square tube with this bar stock.
The green uprights are in a pattern.
This was all good until I mated the bar coincident to the top of the upright.
Then for some reason it fully defined one of the pattern instances to be cocked and rotated slightly.
As you can see the selected bar is not parallel and there are no errors on the tree...

People wonder why I dog on SW so much. Since 2015 SW has been doing nothing but getting worse.
...Onshape started around 2014-15... They must have taken the cream of the crop with them.
Good news for the future of Onshape, competition is just not trying anymore. 

john_mcclary

https://youtu.be/QpcbM4-Q_dE

I swear it never ends lol
now why would a derived pattern in an assembly delete all of the skipped instances in the original part?
I would be submitting all the bugs I find, but sw support has never fixed anything I submitted in the past, or they say you need to upgrade to the latest version. (but that usually means more crap will be broken)...

By the way Onshape: You really really need to add Derived Component Patterns into assemblies (sketch driven, pattern driven, etc.
That is one thing SW has on you that is just Godlike, when it works
Nothing like adding a "Point" in a sketch in one part, and having the assembly automatically add all the bearings, rollers, fasteners, notches in the chain guards, Holes into the frames automatically... (when it works...)
https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/9911/derived-component-pattern-assembly/p1?new=1

konstantin_shiriazdanov

If this thread was an article in some old respectable newspaper it might be named something like this: Traditional CADs - do they sucks? The true story of John McClary.

john_mcclary

heh, This thread a place I can go to vent when I'm stressing out with SW.

Sad thing is these problems were always there, but you just dealt with it because there was nothing better. Its not until you got used to the idea of a file-less system that just works no matter what you name a part, or make copies. You go back to the old system and all those problems just are amplified by the fact there is an easier way, if only the skeptics here would give it a real try.

Onshape was mentioned here a while ago, as kind of an office joke. "CAD in the browser.. Yea right".
But I saw it was free and thought it couldn't hurt as a toy for home... Turns out it is more than capable of doing anything we do here. Some things it does better to the point I have convinced them to do that stuff exclusively in Onshape. Unfortunately it's only 1 small thing we do here and only takes a couple days to do from start to finish. (takes a week in Solidworks lol)

ah well, some day they will see... (took 3 years of convincing to switch to solidworks, probably take another 3 to ween them off it)

konstantin_shiriazdanov

Yep, from todays perspective the idea to keep your data under the control of some 3-rd party system look rather strange. Possybly a huge number of bugs originate from that. Those where the days...

Don_Van_Zile

@john_mcclary I feel your pain and can't wait for a lot more companies to start trying it out.

We're using Onshape on a very small job right now, but I hope to graduate and/or start "branching"    out to other products/jobs very soon. When Onshape releases Weldment/Beam and Cut-List functionality that is native without Featurescript, that's when I see machine design industries really start to try it out for the switch/win and really start growing.

I'm in the motor city where I'm at there are countless automotive suppliers and there other numerous special machine & tool industries who will start to use it as well assuming drawings keep improving and performance. Here are just some examples of some other projects:








See this video for a look at "Modern Automotive Press Lines" today
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMsKhUiMnOg

michael_mcclain

Damn @Don_Van_Zile....

That is some impressive machinery. I can see immediately where a native weldments functionality can be leveraged!

I'm a major fan of the beams feature in my structural work and also hope to see native functionality in the future. I've created a few beam profile libraries which I'm thinking of sharing in a forum post here soon so others can benefit from fuller libraries of standard sizes.

Once again, very nice work!