You can rent a non-commercial license for $99 a year. Still sucks because it's the usual SaaS hostage situation.
They also recently raised the price of a real license by making you purchase a couple years of updates (which are typically ~worthless as a user). I was half prepared to swallow the $4k or so but that extra bump made me balk again.
There is no moderately priced, fully featured CAD on the market. Unless FreeCAD has recently overhauled their UI, it is immensely painful to do things which are 2 clicks in Solidworks.
Yes, I had a really hard time getting used to the UI. Later found the ModernUI Workbench plugin which made it a whole lot better.
https://wiki.freecad.org/ModernUI_Workbench
edit: This plugin seems unmaintained and Ondsel is probably the way to go now if you want a better organized UI.
Once they release 2024.3 I probably will! They are definitely saying all the right things. I filled out their user survey and was pleased to see UI/UX at the top of the responses. If they start delivering meaningful UI revamp I will certainly send them some money - I cannot express how much I want a KiCAD equivalent for mechanical CAD to exist.
Alibre Atom3d? I too have failed at freecad, and am a fusion360 exile. The old school "purchase your software" lifetime license model and the fact that I've not needed the "advanced 3d modeling" feature of Design pro for my 3d printing/etc needs has kept me fairly happy with it. They have a free/hobbyist version, but I just paid them for the basic atom3d (when it went on sale??) a while back.
I've been using this as well, since the feature set vs license terms and pricing were so good. But man is it slow and clunky compared to Fusion360.
Just trying to model a very basic part, I feel like I'm constantly fighting the software trying to figure out how to get it to understand what constraints I want, or why it won't accept something that feels like it should be obvious. Or jumping through hoops like linking figures across sketches rather than being able to use parts of a single sketch for separate features. Sigh.
I just picked up Plasticity earlier this week to start trying to learn it, it's been on my radar for a while. I've been using TinkerCAD for years for making my simple models, and it works really well for the basics but there are things that become painful there that Plasticity has promise of making a lot easier.
One of the first tutorials I went through was really frustrating though. Some of it may be that Plasticity is a quickly moving target right now (lots of tutorials are for v0.x or 1.4, with current being v24, for an idea).
A lot of the pain was this tutorial just didn't touch on the basics it was assuming you knew. Some of it was just getting used to the tool and figuring out what mode you are in and which you need to be in to accomplish what you need to do. I struggled a lot with just getting keyboard shortcuts and the trackpad navigation to work. I never did find a description of mouse/trackpad mappings (possibly made worse by there being ~5 themes you can select from).
It shows a lot of promise, but there's going to be a bit of a learning curve. But there was a learning curve on TinkerCAD too, I just need to keep that in mind.
Pricing is ok: free 30 day trial, $150 for a license with 1 year of updates, and $299 for the Studio license. I don't use CAD that much, like maybe a model a month or less, so it's kind of a big bite to take for me personally, especially with it being young and likely to need to spend $150/year for a while here as it's revving up. The Studio version's xNURBS feature seems like it might be really enticing, but just makes that even harder for me to bite off.
I probably should try OnShape just because they do have that free plan.
I'm also looking at OpenSCAD for doing parameterized models. I installed it last night and asked Perplexity AI to generate a model, and it made a good start at it, but couldn't quite get the tongue-and-groove right.
I actually bought Plasticity early on, but bailed, because I found the UI confusing.
I was a bit more successful with Dune3D: https://dune3d.org (see the discussion I made on Github about working through the tutorial).
That said, OpenSCAD is more my speed, and I've been using it for a long while now, and have even gotten started on a library for the new OpenPythonSCAD, Python-enabled fork: https://pythonscad.org
I like the idea of openscad and sometimes use it, but the fact that it is no good for producing drawings suitable for machinists or 2d CAM programs is too much of a limitation. I wish someone would extend the idea to be more universally useful. Also, I wish I could afford for that someone to be me.
Solidworks perpetual licensing has always had an annual maintenance fee associated with it, but they changed it a couple years ago where if you let your maintenance subscription lapse they charge you for the years you missed plus an additional fee. They also increased their maintenance prices by like 30% last year.
So we are now in the process of switching to Creo which, while being a user experience nightmare, is so much more stable and runs faster than Solidworks.
Agreed about FreeCAD, the user interface is terrible and even though Ondsel exists I just can't stand the way the program works. As much as I want to use FOSS software there really isn't much that beats the commercial products if you have access to them.
Yeah, the different, incompatible assembly plugins is why I stopped using FreeCAD a few years ago.
That's reportedly been fixed (guess they picked a winner?), but I haven't taken a look since. I probably will, at some point, but I generally have a different focus these days.
They didn't pick a winner. They (Ondsel and others) evaluated all the workbenches, chose the best ideas and built a new workbench around a new (well, new to C++) solver.
It is. The chap they hired to do port his solver has done really great motion solving work in the past (and, amusingly, had an application called "FreeCAD" before FreeCAD existed).
You just reminded me that I had tried Catia once before and that it also completely flummoxed me in how unobvious its approach was.
Now why would anyone choose that program as the one to base theirs off of, it isn't like Pro/E and SolidWorks weren't around in 2002 when they started FreeCAD.
I've been looking for a while at BricsCAD (as an alternative to VariCAD), but when you add in sheet metal folding and ability to export and import STEP, it starts getting expensive.
I just checked their site and their 20% off prices actually seem reasonable—at least before realizing they are yearly costs.. They do sell also perpetual licenses where you pay for the product of your selection and then a yearly maintenance fee, and this would perhaps make the most sense for a hobbyist, but this already feels a bit expensive.
I've been trying to get into FreeCAD, but some of my existing models seem to be a bit slow with it, not to mention the different workflow. But I'll give 1.0 a shot!
BricsCAD is ok. It's more of a direct modeler with constraint support though. It may or may not matter to you depending on the kind of work.
I tried it for a while, and while I generally liked it, also got stumped by the artificial limitation of STEP import/export, which made it a non-starter even for hobby projects. This is, IMHO, the dumbest thing they could do in terms of licensing.
Whose salaries, exactly? In most of the country, that's a couple months rent for an entire middle class family. I earn well, and I cannot imagine ever paying that much for any piece of software unless I needed it for a profit-making venture and the ROI was very obvious and very positive.
Fusion was initially (and still is to some extent) targeted explicitly at hobbyists. At one point the CEO made lots of noise about his commitment to the maker community. 'Course since then Autodesk went from a company run by a maker to a company run by a marketing dweeb and a beancounter.
Sorry, but Autodesk was always run by beancounters. They wanted their share in office products, and went lucky with CAD. Read John Walkers "Autodesk Files".
In the context of Fusion, it was the pet project of Carl Bass who is very much a maker. He constantly championed free access for hobbyists to Fusion 360. I suspect a big part of his departure was due to not having any path towards monetizing the huge cash sink that was Fusion. Bass' replacement was the chief marketing officer.
And how many of those saved weeks are being spent fighting draconian licensing software? In a past life I had a few architectural firms as clients and actually getting AutoCAD licensing shit to work was a huge pain point.
You need to balance those weeks spent fighting licensing issue (seriously?) against the time that's lost by using a piece of software that is a nightmare to use... if it doesn't crash. Which it does all the time.
Admittedly, it's been 2 years since I last used FreeCAD, but I've spent literally more than a hundred of hours with it trying to make it do what I wanted it to do only to come to the conclusion that mechanical CAD probably just wasn't for me.
And then I tried Onshape and, surprise, it wasn't me after all.
Irrelevant; such a license would be purchased by the business and wrote off as a loss on the income/loss sheet.
Needless to say, for a business a few or even several thousand dollars a year is practically nothing if it's critical to business operations and ensuring productivity.
If you're buying this for your own personal use? Yeah, you're gonna need a lot of disposable income or some really good justification. For your own small business use? Yeah, you're gonna need to justify that cost against your estimated annual income and other losses.
What's irrelevant to what? The actual market for CAD software is well funded businesses that are buying it as a productivity tool, so of course their approach to the cost is very relevant when trying to understand the pricing.
The context was the cost of a Solidworks license within the purchasing power of an average salary. Meaning the question posed was whether an employee could buy a Solidworks license.
To that, I say that is irrelevant because just like you said: It's the company that buys and pays for the license, not a singular employee on a salary.
The salary of the employee provides the basis of their cost to the company, so any tool that increases their productivity for a small portion of that cost is something they are going to consider.
I wasn't imagining that the typical person making $60k year would enjoy blowing thousands of dollars on a CAD package. This is why they aren't cheap though, because typical people don't buy CAD packages, companies do.
They also recently raised the price of a real license by making you purchase a couple years of updates (which are typically ~worthless as a user). I was half prepared to swallow the $4k or so but that extra bump made me balk again.
There is no moderately priced, fully featured CAD on the market. Unless FreeCAD has recently overhauled their UI, it is immensely painful to do things which are 2 clicks in Solidworks.