Differences between Alibre and other CAD, Fusion etc?

[JST]

This is something that probably needs to be dealt with on a marketing basis, because frankly the free CAD is probably a major competitor as well as the obvious ones.

Is there an actual comparison of CAD system capabilities and features anywhere?

I'd surely like to be able to rebut those who say "Cad system X has tons more features", or, more commonly, "Free CAD does just as much or more".

I understand when someone prefers Solidworks. I have used it and it is a good package, although one I do not like as well as Alibre on a usability basis. I also find that it has at least as many quirks and odd failures as Alibre. But it has tons of add-ons, and is a very workable CAD system.

The main problem I find is with free CAD. I have no complete answer when someone asks "Why should I pay for outlandish maintenance costs when Fusion is FREE?". Fusion is the competitor most often mentioned, apparently it has tons of users, which is no surprise since it is free for the casual user.

I am pretty certain that Fusion does not have all the capabilities that Alibre has, but on the other hand it apparently has some that Alibre does NOT have. But, not having used it, and not wanting to use it, I cannot give a list of things it is missing but Alibre has.

 

[dwc]

The biggest problem with Fusion is that it is cloud based, the data, your project is never really yours and you can do nothing to assure that it is always available.
For more than a casual hobbyist it is IMHO completely useless.
I have not even looked to see if it has good features, if I cannot control my data I will not use it.
Don

 

[Uman]

Fusion 360 is cloud based and that compromises every design you produce; you may as well post all your designs (files) on this website for all to see and have.
Don't give up your privacy; Autodesk is not your partner or your friend.

 

[JST]

One would assume that the standard commercial version of Fusion would HAVE TO be local storage. All the other CAD programs are, and it is indeed a non-starter to have cloud storage. Presumably that is the "price" of using a free product.

I had thought someone had mentioned a few differences in actual available tools between Fusion and Alibre, etc. As I recall that (which I could not find again) there were some facilities that were not included in Fusion, although I am not aware of any big issues of features between Alibre and Solidworks. Having used both Alibre and SWX, I really did not find anything that one had and the other lacked in modeling tools.

Mostly I was thinking of any sort of detailed comparison between several of the major CAD systems, which would, I suppose, have to include Fusion.

Perhaps they all have similar tools and there is no point.

I'm paid up with Alibre, and would not consider Fusion, certainly not the free version. I have no idea what the annual cost is on the standard version of Fusion, I seem to recall $100/month? I did not like using Solidworks, although the fully loaded version was nice and did have some good extras.

 

[HaroldL]

. . . Having used both Alibre and SWX, I really did not find anything that one had and the other lacked in modeling tools. . . .

Your work in SWX may not have been in sheet metal. SWX has form tools which are used to create, in sheet metal, various formed features such as louvers, embosses, extruded holes, bridge lances, shovel lances and a whole variety of custom shaped features. Other sheet metal features needed, in fact necessary, are adjustable weld gap settings for the closed corner tool and the addition of a Tear bend relief option (that's tear as in rip not tear as in "shed a tear").

Soon after I upgraded to Alibre Expert I supplied Alibre with a long list of sheet metal enhancements. After 3DSystems acquired Alibre I recompiled the list and resubmitted the list to them along with examples that I was able to kludge together with Alibre (then Geomagic Design). These were all passed along to development for review. I suppose they didn't score very high in the prioritization process which is why we don't have any of them today.

There is one sheet metal enhancement that we got (I don't recall if it was pre or post 3DSystems) that, in my opinion, has an inherent flaw when used as illustrated in their example and that is the Sketched Bend. There was even an image of this flaw published in the announcement of the enhancement. The image supposedly demonstrated a new feature but in reality it removed metal where it should not have. When the results derived vs. what was expected were explained to Support their response was that is was functioning as designed. :shock: :shock: If that is the case then what was illustrated was a limitation to the tool.

 

[swertel]

For sheet metal, I still use Solid Edge. Best in the business, regardless if comparing low-end, mid-range, high-cost, or extra sprinkles.

 

[bigseb]

Free vs paid-for... the question that keeps coming up...

I like that there are free packages. Its good for home engineers (hobbyists). Some of them do some pretty good projects with free CAD. What no-one does though is any real work with it. I can only speak of my industry where we'll get existing tooling CAD from our client (be it Land Rover, Toyota, Nissan, etc) and need to modify it to some extent, usually removing/adding ribs, removing/adding lug or fastening features, removing adding draft, adding new engraving, that sort of stuff. Then extract electrodes, create modification drawings for the toolmakers and so on. Can Fusion, FreeCAD, Design Spark, Creo Elements, 123 Design, et al do this. Extremely unlikely. Often the CAD we get is a real mess (most Catia files are. NX too) so the solid aren't manifold. Then come the import options... we get exports from Catia, Creo, NX, SolidEgde, Solidworks. Mostly Catia. Can free CAD import this? I doubt it.

I challenge anyone that is fluent with a free CAD package to do the above. I'll supply a file. Lets see if we can make it say uncle. Or maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised...

How does Alibre stack-up. In some ways very very good, in others not so much. I just finished a mould design. The first bit (the 3D bit i.e. the fun stuff) went very well. Changes to the design are simple and relatively straightforward. My parts library is growing and growing and now I even have a mould base constructed that runs on global parameters so I can whip up a mould base in no time. Super. Massive win for Alibre. Then I start making drawings and it all falls apart. Got a massive GA drawing. Go back to the 3D and make a tiny change, like an ejector pin clearance hole in only one plate and suddenly a ton of my dimensions are dissociated. Delete these and recreate, make another change and suddenly they are dissociated again. And they aren't even anywhere near the change I made or in any constrained/connected to it. Or I create a drawing, get all my views dimensioned, its looking good but then my manager wants a section through one particular area. Upon sectioning I get a crash. Nothing to do but recreate the entire drawing. Lost a lot of time on drawings. Not wanting to ramble on about drawings but the attached image shows my current problem child. Every little change that gets made and its Dissociation Central at my desk. Not only that but the BOM dissociates too. Grrrr.



Alibre vs other paid-for CAD... stacks up pretty darn well. Solidworks is good, tedious but good. A bit pricey for what you're getting in my opinion. SolidEdge... I worked with a very old version of SolidEdge, V14 I think. I like it but can't say much about the newer ones. Creo is very powerful but by far the worst to work with. The software will frustrate you to the point of suicide. So much so that I turned down job offers simply because they used Creo. Catia... ah Catia, my love... this is the one to beat. Immensely powerful, immense feature rich. If money were no option this would be my choice. NX: never used it. So I like Alibre. I really wish some key issues would be addressed though. The Alibre team would do well to get some in-depth analysis from power users. But for the price... nothing comes close.

My two pence...

 

[swertel]

Catia... ah Catia, my love... this is the one to beat. Immensely powerful, immense feature rich. If money were no option this would be my choice.

That's how I feel about NX.

I have a colleague, regular Solidworks users at her company, who bought 3 seats of OnShape. Why? When they already have proficiency and a massive library of Solidworks data? Because OnShape imports Solidworks files very cleanly and OnShape has the best collaboration tools. It allows their customers, non-CAD experts, to quickly and easily perform design reviews, tweak designs, add comments, etc. to the design. They still maintain the "master" design in Solidworks, so there is a bit of remodeling after the collaborative effort. But even if they have no other reason to use OnShape, when part of the end-item deliverable is the technical data package, it's easier to upload and share via OnShape than it is to email, FTP, or otherwise transfer the data.

Alibre had real-time, passing-the-baton, sharing as well as cloud-based licensing before everyone else. They were too soon. Alibre dropped that technology at about the time the market was picking it up. I hope Alibre, LLC can bring it back, but not before they make drawings easier.

 

[JST]

No, I was not doing sheet metal, I do not do much sheet metal work, actually. I recall doing louvers, but don't recall how I did them.

And, I HAVE run into the issue of dissociated dimensions. No, they often make NO sense. My only "cure" for that is to wait until I am done with changes to redo the drawings, and use the old PDF as a guide to make sure I do not forget any. But there is not even a facility to delete all the bad dimensions at once.

The only other partial cure is to change but not delete. USUALLY (not every time) Alibre will find an existing feature that has a changed dimension. Sometimes not, and I am not sure what causes it. I suspect it is due to automatic surface or feature renumbering when unrelated things are deleted. The cure for that would be not to renumber, but to maintain numbers after creation, and allow "broken sequences". Sketches are allowed to be deleted in the design tree, features ought to be in the model also.

Other programs:

Aside from the cloud problem, which is a real issue for anyone dealing with NDAs, I am told by users that the free and paid versions of Fusion are the same, and the free extends to hobbyists and startup businesses up to a certain size.. No idea what is included, don't really want to find out, I'm just not going there. I do see they have CAM capability included.

I don't have an answer when folks demand to know what they would get that is better from Alibre.... That is the problem. Everyone knows that SWX is a good, complete program. I know it will do things alibre does not, and for the price , it had better do them. Fewer people know about Alibre, so it has to have some sort of advantage that folks care about. Unfortunately the maintenance for fusion is actually cheaper than Alibre.

And, it is a problem for Alibre also. How to get folks to spend the maintenance money for a program that may do about the same things as a free program? Solid modeling programs have certain things they have to do,

Maybe autodesk has a similar issue, how to get real paid users of Fusion? They are building up a base of folks "trained in" the use of Fusion, and they clearly have the resources to develop it into something that could easily give SWX or even Catia serious competition. I don't know that a company would switch. I DO know some that switched from the old Pro-E to Solidworks, way back when it started.

 

[bigseb]

How to get folks to spend the maintenance money for a program that may do about the same things as a free program?

Question mark!! We don't actually know they do the same thing. And I'm not talking about features such as extrude, revolve, loft, chamfer, etc. As in, "Hey look. I made this keyring in Fusion so why spend money on paid-for CAD?" I'm talking about real complex, time-based results required in a manufacturing enviroment. There has been no testing done in this particular area. I do know the 123 Design, Creo Elements & Design Spark cannot do this. Once that bridge has been crossed consider the online nature of the remaining freebies. We certainly would not be able to use any online storage or processing for our clients work. Not to mention the complete system overload that would take place. Just imagine you have over 10 000 engineers uploading and working on a huge tooling assembly (ours are typically between 500 - 700MB) in Onshape. Their servers would grind to a standstill.

 

[JST]

Maybe I am being dense, but I don't see the distinction, quite.....

" I'm talking about real complex, time-based results required in a manufacturing enviroment. There has been no testing done in this particular area. I do know the 123 Design, Creo Elements & Design Spark cannot do this. "

What specifically are you talking about? I sorta have an idea, but am not sure.

What is it that those "do not do"?

When you say "time based", are you really discussing the time it takes to do a certain task? That could be a big deal if everything has to go upload and re-download or the like. But, according to many, the program resides on the local computer. I don't know if that means it ALL resides there, or if that is a "shell" that calls cloud-based routines. Makes a difference.

Same for data, models etc. many claim they reside locally, others say it is "recommended to back up locally" which implies it is NOT kept locally.

At one time someone, maybe here, had come up with things that Fusion, specifically, did NOT do that Alibre did. That info may be out of date now, as Fusion is updated all the time (suggesting it is substantially cloud based).

Anyhow, the exact same program seems to be the "paid-for" version of Fusion..... If it has the problems I think you mean, then they will not get a lot of paid users.

BTW, yes, the usual deal is "I did this in Fusion, and that PROVES there is no advantage to paying hundreds for what you can get free". It is attractive to the "Harry Homeshop" types, who often are "aggressively unconcerned" about productivity.

 

[bigseb]

" I'm talking about real complex, time-based results required in a manufacturing enviroment. There has been no testing done in this particular area. I do know the 123 Design, Creo Elements & Design Spark cannot do this. "

What specifically are you talking about? I sorta have an idea, but am not sure.

I mean that the general maker and hobby community are well served by the current free CAD but a commercial enterprise isn't.

What is it that those "do not do"?

Off the top of my head: imports and exports and common formats other than stl, drawings, assemblies (usually), error finding. There are probably more but a person that actually uses one of these programs and knows it well would need to pick apart one of my projects and see if they can achieve the same results.

When you say "time based", are you really discussing the time it takes to do a certain task?

Yes. Specifically how long does it take to achieve the same result.

Do you have any free software installed. If not would you be willing to? If so pm me your email address and I can send some files typical of what I do. Lets see when the freebies say uncle...

 

[JST]

I do not have any free CAD installed. Alibre and an install of AutCad LT from long ago for real 2D only stuff, that's what is here, unless you count PWB design programs.

I'd consider doing a comparison, but I don't look forward to learning yet another CAD system.... and it would hardly be a fair comparison unless I was equally skilled in both. I definitely am curious, however.

From what the Fusion users say, Fusion is evolving toward being equal to the fully loaded version of Solidworks, with mechanics, motion, CAM facilities, version control like vault, stress analysis, etc, etc, and that is in the free version. How that works out in reality is quite a different matter, of course.

When you have people who are not all used to solid modeling, they are somewhat easily impressed. A few enthusiastic folks commented that since it was parametric, it was a breakthrough over the other 3D CAD systems....!! Obviously they are "slightly" less well informed than they might be.

To me, the takeaway here is that the Alibre folks need to work on some extensions. To LOOK reasonably competitive, Some things need to be in there.

1) Libraries. REAL libraries that are lockable. This is an absolute REQUIREMENT, one that I run up against EVERY DAY. It is one big reason for considering another program.

2) More constraints, including mechanically useful ones, like path following for cams, the ability to set motion limits by path or rotation angle, and a "gear/pulley type" constraint with a rotation ratio.

3) Version control

Beyond that, just look at the list of goodies, and take a poll.

One thin I would add right away, is the ability to read a Fusion file. NOT make a fusion file, necessarily, but for sure, read one.

 

[bigseb]

Re:

... but I don't look forward to learning yet another CAD system...

Exactly my feeling :|

From what the Fusion users say, Fusion is evolving toward being equal to the fully loaded version of Solidworks, with mechanics, motion, CAM facilities, version control like vault, stress analysis, etc, etc, and that is in the free version.

And us in the know say riiiiight and smile quietly to ourselves. Cos here's the logic: Autodesk (a company even greedier than 3D Systems) is gonna release a free software that is as capable, if not more so, than Solidworks (and by extension Inventor and Revit). *insert sarcasm smiley*

The Solidworks crowd are the same in a way. They tell me all too often that because Dassault owns both Solidworks and Catia that Solidworks is just as capable as Catia as they are essentially the same under the hood.

No, Fusion might be a nice free software to muck about with but the reality is that no serious engineering, aerospace or automobile company is going to turn to Fusion.

 

[HaroldL]

Yeah, someone hears "Free" software and they come flocking like lemmings over a cliff. If they take the time to actually read the agreement they will see that "free" is not "Free for a lifetime". There is a limit to AutoDesk's "generosity".

Startup:If your entitlements have been designated as “Startup, ” You may use the service if You are (i) a company generating less than $100,000 (or equivalent in other currency) per year working on a project or product that is not yet commercially available, (ii) an individual working on a project or product that is not yet commercially available and is generating less than $100,000 (or equivalent in other currency) per year, or (iii) an individual using the service on a personal basis that is not for commercial, professional or for-profit use. The term for Your Startup use will commence on the date access is granted and will end on the earlier of (a) one (1) year from the date of access; (b) the date where the company or product or project generates more than $100,000 per year, or (c) the date of notification to You from Autodesk (which may be provided (1) via email to the registered email address or (2) via notice in the administrator site or account of Your site or account, or (3) via any other manner deemed reasonable by Autodesk which involves specific notification to You (including, for example, by in-service notification functionality)).

 

[nvanlaar]

The biggest problem with Fusion is that it is cloud based, the data, your project is never really yours and you can do nothing to assure that it is always available.
For more than a casual hobbyist it is IMHO completely useless.
I have not even looked to see if it has good features, if I cannot control my data I will not use it.
Don

It's actually a hybrid. The last Xnumber of files accessed are stored locally and there is the option to flag files for offline availability. The software even has an online/offline toggle. They are working on a 100% cloud based solution (CAD in a browser, like Onshape), but that is probably year(s) away. They have been hammered the last few times there have been internet outages and as a result have made offline work and transitioning more of a priority.

Fusion is a fantastic program for free and imho can be worth the subscription, depending on what you are wanting to do. I used it entirely on my last project and the flexibility of the software is nothing short of amazing. Where it is weak is in traditional manufacturing processes. ie. drawing creation/management, weldaments, etc. Sheet metal is new and limited so flat pattern work is still a little clunky and again, drawing creation is weak. Honestly, drawing creation is the only area I really hate in this CAD package. Joints (constraints) are completely different and take a concerted effort to understand coming from Alibre/SW/Inventor/traditional parametric CAD, but once you understand what is going on with them, they are rather intuitive imo.

Something that people here in particular would/should appreciate is the continual improvements and updates that are fed to the users. I really like the update model that is being used. There is usually an update to add or improve functionality about once a month and bug fixes are incredibly prompt. It is unobtrusive as they download in the background automatically and only install when you are ready.

 

[dmckee101]

Autodesk is not your partner or your friend.

Amen to that.

 

[RCH_Projects]

Re: Re:

1) Libraries. REAL libraries that are lockable. This is an absolute REQUIREMENT, one that I run up against EVERY DAY. It is one big reason for considering another program.

I have been saying this for the last 5 years. The company I work for would never use AD because of this.

Don

Perhaps I don't understand the "lockable" issue!

Since the dawn of "DOS" (that's Disk Operating System for you kids) The ability to "lock" a file at the operating system level has existed.

In fact it is probably the most secure locking of a file possible. Of course Microsoft has made it more complicated than DOS.

The discussion at https://superuser.com/questions/868399/how-to-make-a-folder-read-only-in-windows sheds some light on options.
It seems any "shop" with procedures could do this effectively.

 

[dwc]

Re: Re:

Since the dawn of "DOS" (that's Disk Operating System for you kids) The ability to "lock" a file at the operating system level has existed.

Yes, of course one can do that, but then it is impossible to save your assemblies.
For unknown reasons AD sometimes (read often) thinks it needs to save parts that have not been changed.
It only takes one read only part to make it impossible to save the assembly.
I have been through this and explained it so many times over the years.
Don

 

[JST]

DWC is perfectly correct.

What is needed is a library that Alibre WILL NOT SAVE TO unless you use a "librarian" mode.

Alternately, it might be that Alibre will not save OVER an existing file unless in "librarian mode".

Alibre by default saves EVERYTHING when a "save" is done. So it is always re-writing everything.

When you mix that up with the INSANE defaults to last location for saves, there is so much possibility for utterly destroying your "library" that it becomes a useless thing to try to work around. ALIBRE NEEDS A REAL LIBRARY.