Quote:
Originally Posted by kramarczyk
Elgin, I'm not sure what you are referring to with the term 'mesh', but if it relates to the surfacing capability then I think you are correct.
From my experience in the early nineties GM handled different types of parts with different software. Chunky solids used UG. Sheet metal parts and class 'A' surfaces used CGS. There may also have been some others for various specializations. When I landed at GM in 2000 I found us globally on one system for product development, NX (UG). My conclusion is that UG picked the capabilities of the other systems so there was no need to maintain the others. From looking at the Unigraphics Virtual Museum it appears that this trend started with the creation of UGII in 1983 (which is the system that most of us think of as Unigraphics) and accelerated with the acquisition of the Parasolid kernel in 1988. Unigraphics has gone through several major rebuilds in it's long history (UG, UGII, NX), so I am looking forward to what major reinvention NX holds for us. 
I guess it's not surprising that it is used by aircraft and automotive folks; Unigraphics was owned by McDonnell Douglas and General Motors at various point during its development. Although a little dated, this article shares an automotive point of view on the needs of a CAD system. Keep in mind that since this article was written, two of the companies mentions have been consolidated into NX.  |
A guy i work with here used to be at GM and Bell Helicoptors, and have heard all of his experiences with Katia, and Ug, and finally NX when it was created. It has apparently lost "user friendlieness", and continues to do so with each revision. I had used solidworks and Inventor through other internships and FIRST, and getting started on UG NX5 was not fun. Everything seemed to be several steps longer than using SW, so i am greatful when i go back to use it.
My co-worker also said that NX5 would be the last version released, but who knows?