Difference between revisions of "Feature comparison"

From OpenRocket wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎Simulation features: removed supersonic simulation - both have it and quality is arguable)
m (Add missing OR features)
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
This page provides a side-by-side feature comparison of '''OpenRocket''' and '''RockSim'''. Both represent the latest version of the software.
+
<div style="text-align: center;">
 +
<div style="float: left;">[[Resources|&larr; Resources (Appendix F)]]</div>
 +
<div style="width:150px;float: right;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
 +
[[Main Page|&uarr; Back to Contents]]
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
{{UserGuideHelp}}
 +
 
 +
This page provides a side-by-side feature comparison of '''OpenRocket''', version 23.09, and '''RockSim''', version 10.5.
  
 
While hosted on the OpenRocket wiki site, we have attempted to make this an objective comparison between the functionality of the two software products.  If you think something is wrong or omitted, please [[User:Plaa|contact us]].
 
While hosted on the OpenRocket wiki site, we have attempted to make this an objective comparison between the functionality of the two software products.  If you think something is wrong or omitted, please [[User:Plaa|contact us]].
Line 25: Line 33:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Supported file formats
 
! Supported file formats
−
| class="good" | ORK, RKT
+
| class="good" | ORK, RKT, CDX1
 
| class="poor" | RKT
 
| class="poor" | RKT
 +
|-
 +
! Anti-piracy copy protection
 +
| class="good" | None
 +
| class="okay" | [http://www.paceap.com/ PACE]
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 42: Line 54:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! 3D view
 
! 3D view
 +
| class="good" | Yes
 +
| class="good" | Yes
 +
|-
 +
! Photorealistic 3D rendering
 +
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="bad" | No
−
| class="good" | Yes
+
|-
 +
! Export 3D design
 +
| class="good" | Yes (OBJ)
 +
| class="good" | Yes (3DS)
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Design view rotation
 
! Design view rotation
Line 78: Line 98:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Tube fins
 
! Tube fins
 +
| class="good" | Experimental
 +
| class="good" | Yes
 +
|-
 +
! Ring-tail fins
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
|-
 
|-
−
! Ring-tail fins
+
! Fins attached to fins
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
|-
 
|-
 
! External pods
 
! External pods
−
| class="bad" | No
+
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
|-
 
|-
Line 94: Line 118:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Standard component libraries
 
! Standard component libraries
−
| class="bad" | No
+
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Decals
 
! Decals
−
| class="bad" | No
+
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
|-
 
|-
Line 109: Line 133:
 
| class="okay" | Yes, 3 stages
 
| class="okay" | Yes, 3 stages
 
|}
 
|}
−
 
  
 
== Simulation features ==
 
== Simulation features ==
Line 141: Line 164:
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 
| class="good" | Yes
 +
|-
 +
! Computing custom variables
 +
| class="good" | Yes
 +
| class="bad" | No
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 195: Line 222:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! Component templates
 
! Component templates
−
| class="okay" | Nose cone, fin sets
+
| class="good" | Nose cone, fin sets, centering rings
 
| class="good" | Nose cone, fin sets, centering rings
 
| class="good" | Nose cone, fin sets, centering rings
 
|-
 
|-
Line 206: Line 233:
 
| class="bad" | No
 
| class="bad" | No
 
|}
 
|}
 +
 +
== Usage ==
 +
 +
One attribute of interest when comparing pieces of software is how much each software is used and how much of a community exists around the software.  While it's impossible to get an objective measure of the usage and community activity, [http://www.google.com/trends/ Google Trends] does a rather good job at providing an indication of the relative interest levels over time.
 +
 +
Since around 2014, OpenRocket and RockSim have received approximately the same amount of search hits.  The first version of OpenRocket was released in May 2009, RockSim in 1997.
 +
 +
<trends q="RockSim,OpenRocket" date="1/2009 108m" cmpt="q" content="1" cid="TIMESERIES_GRAPH_0" export="5" w="700" h="330"/>
 +
 +
 +
----
 +
<div style="text-align: center;">
 +
<div style="float: left;">[[Resources|&larr; Resources (Appendix F)]]</div>
 +
<div style="width:150px;float: right;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
 +
[[Main Page|&uarr; Back to Contents]]
 +
</div>

Latest revision as of 11:22, 17 December 2023

          

↑ Back to Contents

The current User's Guide is very much a work in progress, any help would be greatly appreciated!
If you'd like to contribute something, just hit the 'Edit' tab at the top.

This page provides a side-by-side feature comparison of OpenRocket, version 23.09, and RockSim, version 10.5.

While hosted on the OpenRocket wiki site, we have attempted to make this an objective comparison between the functionality of the two software products. If you think something is wrong or omitted, please contact us.


General[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
License Open Source (GPLv3) Proprietary
Price Free $124
Supported platforms Windows, Mac, Linux Windows, Mac
Supported file formats ORK, RKT, CDX1 RKT
Anti-piracy copy protection None PACE


UI features[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
Side/back view Yes Yes
3D view Yes Yes
Photorealistic 3D rendering Yes No
Export 3D design Yes (OBJ) Yes (3DS)
Design view rotation Any angle Side and top only
Live CG/CP view Yes Yes
Realtime simulation Yes No

Design features[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
Basic components Yes Yes
Freeform fins Yes Yes
Asymmetric fin configurations Yes Yes
Tube fins Experimental Yes
Ring-tail fins No Yes
Fins attached to fins No Yes
External pods Yes Yes
Canted fins / roll stabilization Yes No
Standard component libraries Yes Yes
Decals Yes Yes
Clustering support Yes, modifiable Yes, one-time wizard
Staging support Yes, unlimited Yes, 3 stages

Simulation features[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
Degrees of freedom 6DOF 3DOF
Geodetic calculation (Earth coordinates, coriolis effect) Yes No
Simulations extensible by own code Yes No
Simulation animation No Yes
Plotting any simulated variables Yes Yes
Exporting simulated data Yes Yes
Computing custom variables Yes No

Optimization and analysis[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
General design optimization Yes No
Mass optimization Yes (using general optimizer) Yes
Stability analysis Yes, per component Yes, per stage
Drag analysis Yes, per component Yes, per stage
Roll analysis Yes No

Printing[edit]

OpenRocket RockSim
Schematic view Yes Yes
Stability information Yes Yes
Simulation results Yes Yes
Parts list Yes Yes
Component templates Nose cone, fin sets, centering rings Nose cone, fin sets, centering rings
Fin placement guide Yes No
Export to PDF Yes No

Usage[edit]

One attribute of interest when comparing pieces of software is how much each software is used and how much of a community exists around the software. While it's impossible to get an objective measure of the usage and community activity, Google Trends does a rather good job at providing an indication of the relative interest levels over time.

Since around 2014, OpenRocket and RockSim have received approximately the same amount of search hits. The first version of OpenRocket was released in May 2009, RockSim in 1997.


          

↑ Back to Contents

Retrieved from "http://wiki.openrocket.info/index.php?title=Feature_comparison&oldid=35959"