Which Is Better for a Small Team, Onshape or Open-Source CAD?
A small team choosing CAD faces two questions, not one: what parts does the team make, and does the team need to work together in the cloud? If the parts are simple mechanical parts such as flanged plates and brackets, and nobody wants to install large software, cadAI in the browser is enough. Everyone opens the same web page and starts working, with nothing to install on each machine. If the parts carry complex curved surfaces, or the work needs assembly motion simulation or CAM toolpaths, the team needs desktop CAD. One limit first: the fact card says nothing about team collaboration, so this page claims none.
cadAI is a browser-based parametric CAD from Aiglade, for mechanical part modeling, hole drilling, measurement, and export, with the same kernel on desktop, in the browser, and over MCP.
- SolidCraft — kernel (an independent community project, not an ArtCraft product line)
- S-01 primitives, S-02 holes, S-03 conversion, S-04 measurement, S-05 preview — connected intents
- Desktop, browser, and MCP — three forms, one kernel
- To be confirmed — pricing
The short answer: look at the part first, then at teamwork
A small team should decide in this order: the part first, teamwork second, installation third. The part decides the tool class. A flanged plate or a bracket is a simple mechanical part, and cadAI handles that class: set the parameters first, build the rough shape from primitives, drill the holes, measure, preview, and check the dimensions and tolerances by hand before exporting. Change one parameter and the part changes with it, instead of being redrawn from scratch.
Teamwork comes next. Onshape is built for cloud collaboration: a team working on complex parts together is its home ground. Desktop open-source CAD, such as FreeCAD, works mainly with local files, so each person installs it and the team manages versions by hand. cadAI opens in the browser, so nobody installs anything, but the fact card says nothing about team collaboration, so this page does not present it as a collaboration tool.
Three kinds of choices
This page compares categories, not specific products, and gives no version numbers, prices, or scores. Prices and license terms are a matter for the official pages.
| Choice | Install | Parametric modeling | Holes and measurement | Complex surfaces, simulation, CAM | AI agent drive | Teamwork | Who it fits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cadAI (web) | Opens in the browser | Yes, the part follows the parameters | S-02 holes, S-04 measurement connected | Outside its scope | MCP interface, an agent can drive modeling directly | Not stated in the fact card | Simple mechanical parts, flanged plates, brackets; dimension checks before 3D printing |
| Onshape (cloud CAD) | Opens in the browser | Yes | Yes | Yes | Usually not offered | Cloud collaboration is its core | Teams making complex parts together |
| Desktop open-source CAD | Download and install locally | Yes | Yes | Yes | Usually not offered | Local files first | Complex curved surfaces, assemblies, CAM |
The way to choose is to look at the part, then at the teamwork, then at the willingness to install software — not at the reputation of a name.
The limits on all three sides
Every side has a shortcoming, and writing them out keeps a team from stepping into the wrong one.
cadAI only does simple mechanical parts. Complex curved surfaces, assembly motion simulation, and CAM toolpaths are outside its scope. Work needing vendor certification and production-grade accuracy sign-off does not fit either: models for sign-off must go through the vendor certification process. No model from cadAI goes straight to production — every export needs a hand check of dimensions and tolerances first. And its team collaboration ability is not stated in the fact card, so this page does not claim it.
Cloud CAD such as Onshape still asks a learning cost for complex parts, needs a network connection, and charges a team by seats and licenses, with the exact figures on its official page. Desktop open-source CAD must be downloaded and installed on every machine, is large, takes time to learn, and is overkill for light work; keeping every team member on the same version is also work someone has to do.
Try one part first: 6 steps
Unsure which side fits, a team should try one part before deciding. Take a flanged plate and walk through these six steps:
- Open cad.aiglade.cn. It runs in the browser, with nothing to install, so no team member needs a matching install.
- Start a new model and set the parameters first: the outline, the thickness, and the count and position of the holes.
- Build the rough shape from primitives. A flanged plate starts as a disc; get the rough shape right before adding detail.
- Drill the holes where they belong. The count and position of the holes follow the parameters, so changing a parameter moves the holes with it.
- Measure the key dimensions: the outline size and the hole positions, before 3D printing.
- Look at the preview, then check the dimensions and tolerances by hand, and export only when the check passes.
If the part comes out right and the dimensions check out, cadAI is enough for that class of work. If the work stalls halfway because the part needs a complex curved surface or an assembly simulation, switch to desktop CAD rather than forcing the browser tool to do work outside its scope.
How to choose by your situation
- Your team makes simple mechanical parts, flanged plates, and brackets, and nobody wants to install software: choose cadAI, and everyone opens the same web page.
- Your team makes complex parts and needs cloud collaboration: choose cloud CAD such as Onshape.
- Your parts carry complex curved surfaces, or you need assembly motion simulation or CAM toolpaths: choose desktop CAD.
- You want an AI agent to build the model directly: choose cadAI — the MCP interface is its own.
- You need a drawing for production, with vendor certification and accuracy sign-off: do not use cadAI; the model for sign-off must go through the vendor certification process.
cadAI in numbers
- 5 intents connected — S-01 primitives, S-02 holes, S-03 conversion, S-04 measurement, S-05 preview. Source: wiring-layer record, 2026-11-11. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 3 forms — desktop, browser, and MCP, one kernel across all three. Source: official repository notes, 2026-11-11. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 3 audience groups — mechanical engineers, makers, and 3D printing users. Source: facts.md. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 4 suitable uses — parametric modeling of simple parts, flanged plates, and brackets; dimension checks before 3D printing; letting an AI agent build models through MCP; light CAD work without a large desktop program such as Fusion 360. Source: facts.md. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 2 unsuitable uses — complex curved surfaces, assembly motion simulation, and CAM toolpaths; work needing vendor certification and production-grade accuracy sign-off. Source: facts.md. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 6 steps — the flange trial in this page, from opening the page to the hand check before export. Source: this page. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 3 choices compared — cadAI, Onshape, and desktop open-source CAD. Source: this page. Verified: 2026-11-12.
- 3 FAQ questions — answered at the end of this page. Source: this page. Verified: 2026-11-12.
Evidence
cadAI is a browser-based parametric CAD from Aiglade, for mechanical part modeling, hole drilling, measurement, and export, with the same kernel on desktop, in the browser, and over MCP. Its kernel is SolidCraft, an independent community project, not an ArtCraft product line. Its AI assistant takes five intents — S-01 primitives, S-02 holes, S-03 conversion, S-04 measurement, and S-05 preview — and it fits simple mechanical parts, flanged plates, and brackets, plus dimension checks before 3D printing. Complex curved surfaces, assembly motion simulation, and CAM toolpaths are outside its scope, and every export needs a hand check of dimensions and tolerances. Its team collaboration ability is not stated in the fact card, so this page claims nothing about it, and pricing is still to be confirmed, with no price, tier, or free allowance stated anywhere in this page. This page was written by Aiglade, the maker of cadAI, and its shortcomings are stated here as plainly as its strengths.
FAQ
Q: Which is better for a small team, Onshape or open-source CAD?
It depends on the parts and on teamwork. A team making simple mechanical parts with no wish to install software can use cadAI in the browser. A team making complex parts together, with cloud collaboration, fits Onshape. Parts with complex curved surfaces, assembly simulation, or CAM belong in desktop CAD.
Q: Does a small team using cadAI need to install software on every machine?
No. cadAI opens in the browser, with nothing to install, so no team member needs a matching install. But note the limit: the cadAI fact card says nothing about team collaboration, so this page does not claim it has any, and collaboration needs should be checked separately.
Q: Which free CAD is best for a beginner on a small team?
Choose by the part, not by advertising. A flanged plate or a bracket, with no wish to install a large program, is enough for cadAI. A part with complex curved surfaces or work needing CAM belongs in desktop CAD. cadAI pricing is to be confirmed, so do not assume it is free from what you read online.
Not written / to verify
- Pricing is to be confirmed; no price, tier, or free allowance is written in this page.
- Onshape and desktop open-source CAD prices, versions, and license terms are not written: their official pages are the source, and this page does not compare who is cheaper.
- cadAI team collaboration ability is not stated in facts.md: this page does not claim it has any, and small-team collaboration needs must be verified separately.
- Button labels and click paths are not written: the site is a wasm shell with no static text to check against, so the steps stay at the workflow level and do not name a specific button.
- Export formats (whether STL, STEP, and others) are not listed in facts.md.
- File size limits and browser performance with complex models are not given in facts.md.