> users who generate less than $1,000 USD in annual revenue and use for home-based, non-commercial projects only.
Which already makes it unsuitable for any Open Source work. While one might still accept those restrictions for quick one-off projects, those projects are also the ones that FreeCAD can handle fine.
For simple things you can have all your components in a single file and make do but I rather dislike working this way for a ton of reasons.
I’m thinking about solid works when my fusion license expires. At least I’ll own my files and be able to manage them on my own ssd.
I'm a pretty happy FreeCAD guy, actually -- my issues are not FreeCAD but learning design -- but I will be trying it too.
I'll reconsider the $24/yr Solidworks deal now...
I print mostly practical parts so perfection isn't really needed but the finish has been great regardless. The only issues I have had is the bed eventually peeled up after enough PETG prints with no bed prep.
FreeCAD is capable and is indeed free, but as a beginner designing something somewhat complex it really led me into building a rat's nest of a project that I found difficult to salvage. The rough edges and general flaky behavior did not help things, and I found almost none of the user interface intuitive. If I had to do it over again I'd choose F360 or Onshape.
It seems to put off even people who are interested in learning CAD or are already familiar with CAD. It's telling that the best description people can come up with is "capable and free" instead of "easy to use".
I don't know why it particularly needs to be the freely available thing that corners "easy to use", when Tinkercad does that admirably.
With a good introduction, you can get into it and really work on your own designs in a tool nobody can take away from you or nickel-and-dime out of your hands by varying the free offer. You can run it on all of your own hardware forever. And you will actually learn core things about CAD.
The community is good. There's an absolutely amazing number of good free tutorials now; the problem of bad tutorial material is a receding issue. I have not seen anything for Fusion 360 that even comes close to being as transparent, up-front, broadly educational, clickbait-free and informative as the Mango Jelly Solutions tutorials for FreeCAD.
I do consider it a lifestyle choice, still. But then so many creative things are open-ended, freely available/documented challenges, rather than easy. Many rich experiences do not have an easy entry point with early success.
I am a mostly very happy FreeCAD user. It is something that costs me no money but has allowed me to make tools unique to me that have changed my creative life forever.
All the same I'm about to pick up the Solidworks for Makers plan for a year, because I think it's always learning a thing from multiple different perspectives. I don't particularly expect to be swayed, but I do have future plans that involve being a bit more knowledgeable about the other packages. Solidworks is where I am going to start.
There are pretty significant changes to the "fit" of the UI, better preference panels, but there are also significant improvements to UI and tooling in Sketcher, the TNP mitigations mean attaching sketches to surfaces is broadly as safe as it is in other CAD packages, you can directly extrude edge selections in Part Design, there is support (not enabled by default) for multiple separate solids in single bodies in Part Design, pretty major changes in the CAM workbench and architecture workbenches etc.
Most significantly in a workflow sense there's a new core Assembly workbench; combined with the TNP mitigations that is an enormous change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Dj3p1nCmrE
It's very much not just "under the hood".
Still more things to fix -- lots of stuff has already changed in the 1.1-dev weekly builds.
(Gets even better in 1.1, too -- and there are new changes coming to the core datums)
I personally don't think overall UX is the biggest problem, if you're prepared to learn it. I've used much worse software than this, and I think a lot of people are just moaning that it isn't "immediate" or "easy". I particularly don't understand criticism of it from the OpenSCAD direction: that's often just misinformed whining from people who hate GUIs and don't believe they can offer anything over text.
Since the new Assembly workbench and the TNP mitigations were added I think it's on pretty solid footing; you can do many things more easily in Part Design now than before, based on geometry edges rather than sketch edges.
One thing I would suggest is using the tab bar workbench selector rather than the dropdown: for some reason that makes the whole thing so much more fluid.
The biggest problem is still, ultimately, robustness.
This is not a problem F360 shares, and that feature is what you pay for.
There were always workarounds that made it possible to do what you say: you could offset your sketches from base planes rather than attach them to generated geometry, and otherwise avoid using generated geometry by making use of parametrics.
Once you knew how it wasn't particularly onerous. For a couple of years of 0.20 and 0.21 I had no TNP-related breakage because of this.
(There could be some problems with assemblies that were a bit more challenging.)
However, this is now essentially a solved problem in 1.0. There's a high level of mitigation in a stable face-naming algorithm that keeps track of the changes OCC creates. There are still edge cases being reported, but the implementation works well. I've stopped worrying about applying the normal base-planes technique.
(There are still edge cases of TNP in other CAD packages, even those built on Parasolid, because it's a research-grade problem; once you think about it in depth, it can never be "solved". It can only be mitigated to the point where the package usually does what you would expect.)
You can now sketch on faces, edit dependencies, make Pads and sweeps from solid geometry edges as well as sketch edges, refer to generated geometry in sketches, and see the subsequent features stay where they should be.
So this "main problem with FreeCAD" is essentially in the past, as it has been for a long time in the RealThunder branch where the mitigations were originally developed.
Another "main problem" -- the lack of a core Assembly workbench -- is also addressed.
The final "main problem" of FreeCAD, IMO, is that OCC's implementations of fillet, chamfer and thickness are less capable than other modern CAD systems; there are limitations regarding thick fillets on thin edges, essentially. It might be possible to get these improved upstream, or it might not be, but there are other ways to get fillets into your design (such as adding them in the sketches, where arguably any "functional" fillet should be anyway).
Anyone who used Blender in the early days knows how far its come. FreeCAD is making that journey too. The 1.0 release is a big step. I use FreeCAD for all of my (admittedly amateur) CAD work. I've designed toys for my kid, props for my Christmas light setup, tool-holders, and any number of things I can't think of at the moment.
If anyone is finding FreeCAD hard to pick up, I highly recommend Mango Jelly's Youtube channel, which offers lots of really great tutorials on using it: https://www.youtube.com/@MangoJellySolutions
I worked alongside people using early versions of Makerbot and Ultimaker, and those were a maintenance nightmare. But recently I got a Kobra 2 Pro for $200, and it's both more capable and easier to use than those old monsters. With PLA it's pretty much hassle-free, no need to tweak anything except print orientation and maybe some support options.