Stick at it, follow the tutorials, and keep trying to model things. The interface of VC and Shark is essentially the same, VC and VCP aren't easier to use. They lack some of Shark's tools, so some things are harder/not possible. The new tools added to VC/P V8 and V9 don't detract from Shark V7, which is still more powerful. The mesh and subdivision tools are additions to V9 VC/Pro, they're freeform modelling tools and are a step away from parametric CAD, which is very . Shark V9 is still under development and is available in beta. Why don't you visit punchcadlabs.com and give it a run? It doesn't have a draw-my-imagination tool, so you're still going to need to learn how to use it, but when you do, it'll give you a better idea of which way you might want to upgrade.

You can't create a fillet between separate solids that occupy the same space, or part-space. Physical properties can't be derived or relied on for a grouped entity because of this possibility either, and PunchCAD doesn't have assembly physics capacity even if the physical logic is valid. Multiple separate solids also have too many possible solutions for situations where blend surfaces meet: adding them resolves that ambiguity. You can fillet discrete or grouped surfaces with Shark's and VC Pro's surface Booleans, however, because they don't have to resolve corners the same way, or comply with the same physics requirement. Grouping is used for utility reasons like complementary selection for transformation or keeping a compound profile coherent for lofting.