Thank you for this detailed and quite objective opinion opinion. What you say could be summarized by "who embraces too much, embraces badly" or the version of the century "Who embraces too much, misses the train".
This is what I also call the French fries cutter syndrome. Consultants of all stripes presents you with a concept. "You see this grill and well you put a potato, then you press the lever and miraculously you have fries at the exit" "Well! Uh! With me it doesn't work because I have very big potatoes! » The consultant or the software publisher "obviously if you put in the bad will because it also works with carrots and moreover you are the only one to tell us this"
Your opinion is important because it represents reality for people who are anchored in reality with all the constraints of an industrial environment. Of course, we're not here to debug!
Thank you for this informative feedback. To use EPDM, it seems surprising that some file types are not or poorly managed in the 3Dexperience while EPDM can manage versions of any type of computer file. Are you sure you haven't missed any customizations of settings? On EPDM we manage the versions of our pdfs/dwgs... Something you've noticed is the cumbersomeness/complexity of setting up computer file management solutions: it's not because it's online that it's easier (I'd even say that it will eventually be the opposite because the 3dexperience may be weighed down with specific features requested by some very large customers. On EPDM, this kind of thing more often had to end up in specific development than in product improvements). And in terms of heaviness, you've only scratched the surface because you seem to be working alone (the management of group/user rights can quickly turn into a nightmare on EPDM if it's not simplified to the extreme: rights management by 2 to 5 groups max and no management at the user level). Having used EPDM via a VPN during the pandemic, it worked both from home (with fiber) and on-site. The archiving times were probably a bit longer but nothing prohibitive.
Thank you @icome for your opinion and feedback (or rather from 3Dexperience if I dare) If other opinions, even contradictory, we are takers.0 I had had a feedback from a person, 1 or 2 years ago which was also negative, I was hoping for some (naïve?) improvements since this period bringing stability and more speed. What scares me is for cases like us with 28 licenses if 28 cloud-based licenses what would be the impact on the bandwidth of our internet connection (Fiber certainly, but not infinite). Currently no PDM and like any new license = 3Dexperience, we are gradually learning about our future... Edit: during the online test on the show in Nantes, it seemed rather smooth (connection via wifi from the host hotel, probably via fiber but shared in any case)
Following @icome's feedback, wouldn't this be an opportunity for Visiativ and/or Solidworks representatives to be heard here? Just to have a little counter-expertise, without any wooden language.
It is true that when you walk on the forums dedicated to Solidworks in general and to 3Dexp in particular, this type of feedback is mostly negative on:
The costs of the different roles.
The tools associated with these roles are not necessarily relevant forcing you to buy another Role.
The overall ergonomics need to be reviewed. (a shame because Solidworks is still well placed in this field).
There is a lack of official "Tutorials" on the entire 3DX platform.
The endless and almost daily updates.
Multilingual translations seem to be done with an old Google Translate module.
But what seems to come up most frequently is the overall slowness of 3DX.
@froussel, I have my own platform but I am also invited to join customer project teams with their own platform. And indeed, rights management is a real headache! In fact the menus are not clear enough, there are clickable icons everywhere, positioned without any real logic. As a result, you never know where the option you're looking for is hidden...
VPN and 3DX, I don't even dare to imagine the carnage! The problem of "everything online" is always the same, when you're on the move it always ends up sharing a connection with a mobile phone that has difficulty receiving 3G and you're the one who looks like a puppet in front of your customers!
What they said is limited memory to 25GB. Then you take out the checkbook... On the other hand, online the weight would be less. (not tested but information heard during the MyCAD.) It seems that only one customer in Europe has requested an extension due place. Either it's really much lighter online, or the customers have recently started on the 3Dexperience, hence the little giga needed.
We, for our part, have made an approach to take an interest in it and see if we take the plunge. after X meetings it came out that frankly it didn't seem to be perfect. Too theoretical, not suitable for us in any case. He offers us 15GB there I bug how to do all our projects with 15 GB I have to be explained. In my opinion, either he abandons this product or he develops it and offers it to us in 10 years lol. As for the price, then a real subject for us, it offers an absolutely crazy amount of money in 3 figures.
Good evening I don't see how the files would be less heavy online vs. local of a CAD workstation. A SW file is still a SW file and some files can be hundreds of MB without any problems (drawing in general which is absolutely not optimized). In addition, since it's a system like EPDM, if I take ours that we've been deploying for more than 10 years now, we've gone from about 300GB to more than a TB of data (there's probably some sorting to be done but before activating archiving with version replacement and users confusing recording and archiving it can quickly climb). If the behavior of 3DExperience is similar to OneDrive with the Office suite, the slightest small file modification is saved and creates a version.
To come back to the development side of the platform, that's the problem. 3DExperience is made for Catia and has been running with it for a few years (3DExperience was created in 2012), for SW it's more recent and therefore necessarily the users will be the beta testers. Unfortunately it takes a lot for the platform to improve (a bit like SW's SP0) but it's true that in an industrial environment, playing beta testers is not too much in the habits. We are generally looking for stability and efficiency so there is no time to have fun being blocked by a software that would have blocking bugs.
Being a "Beta Tester" is not too annoying as long as the publisher is attentive (even if we are small SMEs) and very responsive to solving problems and/or improvements.
Yes, that's why we let the smallest structure test the new versions! The problem is that even the little ones are starting to do like us and no one will test for us anymore. So please small structures, a little courage, if you can test the versions from SP0 for the normal version and now for the 3Dexperience! We will be much less bothered then we the biggest structures and we will be fixed for the cloud version!
The small weakness of this strategy is that a small structure will not have the same needs or the same use of Solidworks and its "eco" system, and probably not the same requirements either.
Beta tests are not as thorough at the time. And that's why you still discover bugs yourself.
yes good 6 then
.
