If anyone has gone through the process, it's a big pain.

Not because it was the best tool, (far from it) but because it had become the de facto standard.Ĭurrently PTC lets one use a trial version that expires in 30 days. Autodesk pretty much gave it to the school systems and within the course of a few years dominated the market. (remember those?) Individuals aggressively taught themselves how to use it at home after work. All one needed was a copy of the floppy disks. Everybody and there brother had ACAD loaded on their PC. If you let the user base grow organically by giving it away to individuals, more companies (the real software customer) will see a stronger user base and will tend to more readily implement Pro-E since they will not need to send everyone to training.Īutodesk very successfully used this tactic in the early days. Companies that choose to utilize the software will always purchase it anyway or risk major fines. Unofficially allow individuals to 'pirate' the software thus building the user and knowledge base over time. If PTC really wanted to gain market share, they should simply unlock the product. However, a rose by any other name still smells like a rose.

To me changing the name seems like a desperate move to somehow gain market share from those who are non Pro-E believers. I am actually looking at getting trained on a different tool at my own expense because of the lack of demand for Pro-E experience. Having been searching for work recently, I see fewer requests for Pro-E experience and more for Solidworks, UG, Catia and the rest. There is also a brand awareness that goes back many years. I agree that Pro-E has been a great tool.

Creo elements direct modeling 19