Category Archives: machinedaudiohornlens.com

Machined tweeters and mid range horns for audio complete speakers. Klipsch drop in OEM replacements for tweeters

Solid Edge University 2014, No News is No News

Obviously the content of this post has changed. In thinking about all this Marketing and publicity controversy I have come to some conclusions. A, that it has become no fun as a blogger to talk or post on this. I just get angry and frustrated whenever I think about this topic. Siemens policy is what it is and SE is my CAD program of choice and I am going to leave it at that. B, I am not going to beat this drum any more for a number of reasons including I think that it has become counterproductive to continue in this vein. Rather than sit here and get angry over something I have no financial interest in I am choosing to go back to the technical aspects of the program I use and keep my opinions to myself on corporate policies. I can see why bloggers quit posting for a while or entirely and until you have been here as a blogger you may not understand. You can get wrapped up in a product and forget that it is at the end of the day just a tool of production. So, I am going to put things back into a perspective that makes this enjoyable again.
I am also seriously reconsidering commentaries on other software to. I am losing interest in what Dassault and Autodesk may or may not be doing in the cloud. I choose not to go there and if you do you make a choice as a consenting adult and live with it. If indeed they are even going to force you there which is becoming questionable in my mind anyway. This is another aspect of blogging that tires me and it is just what is really going on? No one ever completely levels with you so you are left with snippets of news and conjecture quite often. At least with the technical side of the software it either works or it does not and these are truths that can be verified.

Paul Waddington used to post a lot and so did that Steve http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blog.cadnauseam.com%2F&ei=EZAaU-3tJY_IkAeZx4G4Aw&usg=AFQjCNHxi6AdkxqCTHZzL3nQ1ewYFKhH0g&bvm=bv.62578216,d.eW0&cad=rja guy who was a fencer from I think AU. They have both just disappeared from the scene and none seems to know why. I have to wonder if the negative side of the software companies finally outweighed the positive aspects of the software for them and when the fun left so did they. Both of them were pretty unhappy with Autodesk before they went away. In any case I am thinking hard here about it all and just what I wish to derive from this blog.

Reality of Cloud Throughput on Public ISP’S

It has been my premise that the cloud is not ready for prime time for a while now but actual studies done proving yea or nay for the cloud are hard to come by. I suspect the cloud people deliberately choose to avoid any proof of concept. Why the opposing side does not have more readily available information is done for a reason as they surely have had to do internal studies at the least. I think they know things they would rather not talk about. “Windows Secrets” is a newsletter I have subscribed to for some time and I recommend it to you. There are two flavors with one being free with abbreviated content and the other subscription for a minor fee with more content. This particular article was from my copy of their paid content and quoted here with permission. First off here is a link to “Windows Secrets”. http://windowssecrets.com/ And here is a link to the article of interest. http://windowssecrets.com/top-story/sorting-out-the-revolution-in-pc-backups-part-2/

The article talks about online backups and the speed with which this can be done compared to other backup methods. What is of interest here is the relative speed of a local LAN or an additional internal or external hard drive compared to over the public ISP throughput rates. We have all heard the silly claims about how the cloud will be much quicker than anything we could do for ourselves autonomously. Claims minus proof of course.
Data saving rates

Now I am not going to quote a lot here nor am I going to talk about methodology. The link to the article will put you in touch with a comprehensive explanation of what was done and why. Suffice it to say that there are a ton of people like me, the vast majority of all CAD CAM users I suspect, who have less than ideal conditions to work under RE data and ISP’s. The overall size of the files used for this study though is of interest to me because I can see data quickly reaching these limits when you think of CAD creation and updating and sharing between all related systems for an average days work at many major companies. The same companies who are major targets of this cloud initiative.

I fully understand the value of something that would automatically update file versions across a whole company reliably. I can’t sit here and tell you that some compelling arguments for some things to be done on the cloud don’t exist. But I can say that the infrastructure at this time and for the foreseeable future is not ready for these types of demands. And of course security which some tell me is ready. Empirical evidence in the form of daily stories about yet another breach or government sponsored intrusion into supposedly secure situations of course belies these claims.

Perhaps the most damning thing to me about this whole cloud idea is that those who propound this as the end all be all will not legally stand behind what they want you to use and they make no serious effort to produce any conclusive evidence with actual working scenarios to buttress their claims. Cost efficiency, unlimited cores for unlimited power, fire your IT staff and the rest and never a full accounting of the costs, of ALL the costs, needed to do this.

It gets back to what I was saying about the impressions Autodesk has given most all the people I talk to about their cloud intentions. If all you ever talk about is cloud this and that then why should I not presume that all you are going to do is cloud this and that in the future? In the same frame of mind if all I ever hear are wonderful claims for the cloud but somehow these claimants never produce actual case studies with all pertinent data over typical ISP conditions I have to presume they are hiding bad things.

Can any of you think of any other reason for such pervasive lack of real life studies by these cloud companies? If I had a bullet proof product I wanted to sell you I darned sure would be busy laying out facts and studies to sell you by and not just empty words of promises where the only concrete thing offered is price tags.

Solid Edge University 2014 BE THERE!

I don’t know where the time goes and here we are looking at the end of the first round of early bird registration for SEU 2014. It will be in Atlanta this year and well after any chance of snow 😉 . The event will be May, that’s right not June but May, from the 12th to the 14th. At $550.00 for the convention cost plus lodging and travel it is the cheapest of all the major MCAD annual events by far. Find out about SE the program and the users and do so with the industries best pricing. http://www.solidedgeu.com/ takes you to the main page.

Here is further info and more links.

· Early bird 1 discount = $100 off until Feb 28 http://www.solidedgeu.com/registration-fees-event-policies/
· Early bird 2 discount = $50 off until March 28
· 3 for the price of 2 discount
· Course descriptions http://www.solidedgeu.com/courses-i.html
· FEMAP Symposium is expanded this year http://www.solidedgeu.com/femap-symposium-2014.html
· Developer day on May 12 http://www.solidedgeu.com/developer-day.html
· Newly renovated venue Westin Peachtree Plaza in Atlanta
· Benefits of attending and how to talk your boss into it: http://www.solidedgeu.com/benefits-of-attending.html

For those of you not familiar with Atlanta it has some of the worst traffic I have ever had the misfortune to drive in and it is every business day without fail. If you are driving I see that the Westin has reserved self parking available for $5.00 per day. Usually I stay at cheaper surrounding hotels but this time in downtown Atlanta I recommend you stay at the Westin and use their reserved parking if you intend to drive there like I do. Well worth the time and money spent and hope to see you all there.

Value Is In The Eye Of The Beholder

This paragraph is added on 3-26-14. Since this post is still being read fairly often I think it only fair to say that since the original post the situation has changed dramatically. The whole Tech Data Base is going to be reworked and indeed this has already begun. If it goes as I think it will the vast majority of all my complaints will be history soon and CAMWorks will take the place it should have had some time back as both powerful and readily useable. In other words for both major facilities with dedicated programmers and simple one man operations like mine. BIG things peering over the horizon for all CAMWorks users so don’t worry be happy. 🙂 Received yesterday this little notice to. The expected release date for assembly mode machining is 14th Apr. This could shift a few days but the time for this is at hand.

I want to note to readers of this post that Geometric is going to take some time this week to show me how I can work the way I want to work in CAMWorks 4SE, if indeed this is possible. I have had a couple of bad weeks with this program and I hope they can show me a better way to use CW4SE without having to fool around with this TDB.There have also been weird things that just happen that tell me there are still bugs to be worked out to. If I ever elect to use the TDB I want it to not interfere with what pays my bills on any given day and be implemented at my convenience and time of choosing to do so. Some of what I write below may change if my current opinion on things changes. Some like pricing and value will not because my idea of prices and value differs from Geometrics. In any case on to the post.

An interesting letter was received here the other day. But first the reason for the letters existence. I have had some very frustrating days with CAMWorks 4SE recently and some is due to my lack of knowledge I am sure and some is due to a rarely improved methodology for their Tech Data Base and how complex and pervasive it is to your decision as to how to use the program. In order to make automatic feature recognition work well you have to embark on a series of never-ending creations of entries of page after page after page of stuff for each type of scenario you wish in little undersized boxes that often can’t be expanded and you have to scroll back and forth in continuously. So if you cut 20 differing materials with say an irregular pocket in it you now have to figure 20 different procedures and save these and the TDB will recognize these when you bring in a part. And then add in the additional strategies of roughing and cutting and the assignment of these to the material types. Can you see the possibilities here for numerous additions that all take time and will at best merely be close in many cases? What I mean by this is that there is a limit to how many of these you will enter into the TDB and at that point in time there will still be feeds and speeds and cuts you will need to input for a particular situation.

The TDB can’t be omniscient. So just how much time does this thing ever really save me at the end of a year with all this added complexity to deal with. None as far as I see it right now and it will add complexity and require I learn things I would rather not have to. I have enough on my plate already. If Geometric wants to appeal to small and large shops they should offer two ways of CAM creation. One with and one without this TDB crammed full of useful tools like two and four flute 11/32 endmills. I don’t think I have ever even seen one of these but it’s there along with hundreds of other similar ones. And even though Volumill which recommends 3 and 5 fluters for most work is a part of the program it is not a part of the TDB or tool library because not one of these is in there. Get ready to spend some time entering in useful tools and sizes that reflect what you actually buy in real life and removing ones that do not. Theoretically you can do this by creating and using tools out of just one tool crib in CW4SE but I have not been able to figure this out. This is one of the things I hope Geometric will be able to show me how do to in a simple and quick fashion and I really hope they are right and I am wrong on this one. I have my money spent and at the end of the day I do want this to work after all.

There is another way and it is the way HSMWorks does it where you select with three easy fill in the blank and select prompts which quickly create the tools in your CAM plan and just fill in the blanks for the rest and go. This whole process takes little time and it tailors your CAM plan to your specific needs right there and then. A friend of mine has this close by and he has a pressure cooker job shop situation. I stopped by there last week to have a look and he cuts a ton of different things and the tool paths are generated quickly and easily. AND there is no reliance on some byzantine TDB set up procedure to make it all work.

So, the eye of the beholder and just what did this one see. The TDB combined with Feature Recognition is a very powerful tool and I can see serious production facilities with dedicated CAM programmers who have the time to use this and set up for it benefitting. For a shop that may not cut a part for a month because the work did not require any mill time it becomes an unneeded burden of complexity that does not save any time and complicates your life. My friend evaluated CW and HSM at the same time and HSM won. Easy to learn and implement and if you really feel you need automation of your strategies there are templates you can set up for THAT situation and not have to fool around with this TDB idea. Look, all these things that fascinate programmers with the absolute majestic beauty of this programmers wonder they have come up with, this thing they never have to learn from scratch or use in a production environment if indeed they even know what a chip looks like, are not fascinating to someone who just spent a gob of cash to buy a program they just want to work. Without needless complexity and decisions made to favor a shop with little time to learn and simplicity of implementation and add to this good tool paths. Obviously tool paths that work well are an essential ingredient and I assume you readers understand without me elaborating on this any more that this is a primary requirement that has to be in place.

Now about this letter I received. I was chided a bit for not appreciating the value of what was in CW4SE. The guy who works for Geometric felt they were offering good value and my reply was he was not a buyer and hardly had an unbiased opinion. That true value is in the eye of the beholder and the amount of cash they are willing to spend to express interest in something. One of the things I have striven to do is to remember that I am just another user. I look for advice on programs as best as I can and try to determine the truth behind what I read and see in person. I am an unabashed fan of Solid Edge. I think it is the flat-out best out there for mid range MCAD and so it is not hard to talk about it in glowing terms and feel that even though I may gush a bit at times it is all still honest and it is what I bought with my money and use with satisfaction. Then there are things like CW4SE where after some time I have big warning flags raised and questions as to exactly what type of shop should be buying into it. It is a lot of money and right at 18% yearly cost of purchase fees to stay current and complex to implement the way they have designed the program to be used. Plus they have been charging full ticket to customers even though this unfinished program still can’t import and use assemblies. This has impacted my work negatively and even though I have paid for it I still don’t have it. I have a set of extrusion dies that I would like to cut as assemblies and I can’t so instead I have to redo the whole thing into a separately created part whose volume and exterior shape mimics the assembly and this is a waste of my time.

What creates value anyway? For my shop it is not five axis or four axis. At least not yet anyway. It is not full-blown G Code machine verification. It is not metallic looking surfaces on verification. It is not a tech data base that is complicated to set up. It is quick and easy to create cam plans with great tool paths for up to three axis parts and two axis lathe. I don’t know what percentage of the market for CAM programs falls into this category but I suspect it to be the vast majority. I don’t have the time or desire to introduce unneeded complication into my days. I also don’t have the desire to pay extra for all these things I do not use or want to use. Make no mistake when you buy the three axis program or the two axis program you are supporting lots of things you did not want and will probably never want. This is true today for almost all software and Microsoft Office comes to mind. We all have it but only use parts of it but at least the price tag is reasonable. So how to choose? What is value? What represents value to YOU.

I am looking at HSMWorks and CAMWorks right now with this thought in mind. One is complex and about twice as expensive to buy initially. And one is one-third the cost annually from then on. One is attached to the CAD program I love and one is attached to that wreck called Inventor or SW which is another place I do not want to be in. One is quick to learn and implement and the other is not. At this point in time I advise CAM buyers that they should be very careful and meticulous in their evaluations of CW4SE. As a matter of fact I consider the idea of a 45 day full trial for CW4SE with tech support made available to you the only condition allowable for you to make an informed decision. If you can’t get this then caveat emptor. And they need to complete the product and make sure the bugs are out of it. I also think they should update the ease of implementing this TDB strategy and the programmer never cut a chip in his life tool database and be aware that few tools you will use are in there. Be fully aware of just what exactly this TDB will mean in time to execute correctly to make it work. As compared to out of the box functionality quick and easy to learn. There are solid reasons for choosing one over the other depending on the size of your operation and the degree of automation you may be able to achieve under certain circumstances and I chose these words deliberately. As far as I can tell the time to use fill in the blanks HSM is not much more time-consuming than a filled in after great time and effort TDB would be. Now some guys at Geometric aware of my frustrations and complaints are going to take the time to educate me as to how to work the way I want to work in CW4SE. My metric for comparison will be how long it takes to do the same things in HSM based on same parts and watching how my friend does it with these. Time will be time and complexity will be complexity. But right off the bat CW4SE is twice as expensive and even more so for ever after.

Value IS in the eyes of the beholders and if you Geometric guys think you are worth twice the price for what you deliver the proof will be in sales volume. Value is not what you wave a magic wand over and then declare it to be. It is what educated buyers or slick salesmen who can sell anything to anyone make it to be. I would rather depend upon honest value myself and at this time my advice to anyone who wishes to buy CAMWorks is to evaluate carefully what you need and what you wish to spend today and forever more. Integration is a great thing to have but it is not an end all be all unless all parts are right for each other and the intended market.

Autodesk May Be Off My Hate You List

Just a short post on this today. All the publicity I have seen for some time for Autodesk has been strictly cloud promotion oriented. I have been having some rather lengthy conversations with Anthony Graves about CAM and Autodesk things in general this last week. He expressed some surprise that I thought Autodesk was going to just the cloud. He was quick to point out that this is not so and some prices over at the Autodesk site seemed to bear this out.

I have been told that in the near future publicity for Autodesk will not overlook this desktop paradigm and indeed it is not in their plans at all to phase this out. Seeing will be believing and they have to publicly start making mention of this as official policy with time frames for it to be real to me. I am impressed with Anthony and not only is he a first-rate eloquent and knowledgeable advocate for HSMWorks he is also one for Autodesk. He tells me it has never been the intent by Autodesk to go purely cloud for the foreseeable future.

Software authoring companies might want to consider something here. All of you. What is the message you are really giving to readers and seekers of knowledge? Do you wonder why your plans and intents are not being accurately perceived by the public? I have looked a lot for info RE Autodesk and the cloud and honestly this is all I hear about and it is the only future way of operating I hear about so just what am I to conclude? And if you mean you think the cloud will be ubiquitous and technical problems all solved in ten or twenty years but not now why not say it that way? And I am most certainly not alone in this impression. And then in addition nothing ever comes out from Autodesk to correct this idea many of us have. So if you persist in half messages I am going to persist in comments based upon half reality because you made it so.

Sorry Dassault, I am not talking about you today as I think you guys are truly wacko and sold out to some sort of social media group think CADCAM thing. This thing you hope will sell to enough of those kids with iWhatever tunnel vision blinders surgically attached to their ears and lives to the exclusion of reality around them. An alternate universe that will go Nova when their batteries fail. I can see the sweaty palms as panic sets in. Thumbs futilely twitching the device as fear of having to actually talk to someone sets in. You know these people as the ones at the restaurant enjoying their night out as each sits there in silence never looking or talking to each other with their eyes glued to their iThings. The Dassault future world as far as I can see.

In this day of the internet what you say and what you don’t say carry equal weight. Your poor message or lack of messages can sink your future just as surely as poor technical capabilities can and word WILL get out for better or worse. This word can be negatively and severely exacerbated by your lack of product improvements or your lack of correct or corrective information.

This of course assumes that you have a marketing department of quality to begin with to do these things.

Retired And Bored, What To Do?

There are some videos you run across by accident that can be quite amusing at times. I live right next to my shop and so travel will never be a problem to get to work. Or to the play room when I get around to semi retirement. It is my goal in the next few years to develop a few lines of manufactured goods and hire a few people to do this so that I will not have to be here all the time. Now with this new-found free time what to do?

Men are quite free compared to women. For instance I can bet your wife has asked you when will you ever grow up as her eyes roll backwards and that expression of smug superiority is put in place. Admit it now. If it has not happened yet and you have a sense of humor and a lighthearted outlook on life your day is coming too when you will be asked to artificially age your mind to match your body. It is just a women thing I guess and they think you need to get all serious and grown up just like they are. But here is my reply to this nearly universal, I fear, womanly request. A request which I suspect is ignored in most cases and for sure in mine.

I want to build one of these and invite the grandchildren over. Check out the treasure this guy has for a wife as she assists the launch and overcomes her maturity straightjacket 🙂

CAM Tech Support Is Needed When It Is Needed

OK today you get to hear Dave vent again. An unprecedented action I am sure. But I think something needs to be made clear here about the value of time to customers VS the value of time to VAR’s and CAD CAM companies. This involves CAM and it has an entirely different concern than CAD and here is the situation as I see it.

You have a part and a deadline for this part and you need to cut it TODAY. It is not like CAD where there are other things you can do in the mean time. You have one goal and one purpose in life this day and it is to cut this important part. So the VAR and the software companies try to walk a fine line between being frugal with their costs and I get all that. I do the same thing and that is why when I have an $84,500.00 dollar mill sitting there and a customer breathing down my neck with a rush job I really really understand costs. The cost to ME when I can’t get timely support for whatever reason. There are other times when you have a part on the mill and a problem and you really don’t want to take it off and do another part. You are dialed in and no relocation zeroing problems until you remove this part just so you can move on and come back to it later. There is some kind of immutable law written somewhere I am sure that says the more variables you introduce into your manufacturing life the more problems you will have. So we like to finish what we have started from beginning to end. It is not in any way shape or form like coming back to revisit your CAD file which is pretty painless.

That $400.00 chunk of metal sits and looks at you because you could not get support and it has problems from bad cuts. You machine shop owners all know what I am talking about. You have heard that silly stuff about just wait until tomorrow or Monday because you have the nerve to be cutting late at night or on a weekend. So you can’t wait and you take a chance and now the scrap that comes out of your pocket. Since it seems that all these CAM companies and VAR’s that sell this stuff do this is has become a condition we buyers have to suffer under. Where the customer is not king except for our customers who demand this from us and we have to service them to pay our bills. They never cut us any slack is the way it is most of the time.

Today I want to mention a rather good experience I had happen in regards to support. I call Ally PLM and I am sure I sounded as frustrated over the CAM support guy being out of the office as I was in real life. However I get a call from the CAM guy about ten minutes later and he pulls to the side of the road and gets his laptop out and has an answer for me in short order. Now I know I am not going to get him after hours but I can say for sure today I am off the hook because of a timely response.

I can’t begin to tell all you CAM authors and program vendors how important this is to us and we do not view what happens with CAM the same forgiving way we view what happens with CAD. Tip of the hat today to Ally PLM, thanks.

CW4SE CAMWorks for Solid Edge 2014 Update, Begining The TDB Jungle Journey

For those of you using CW4SE the SP1 update is finally out today and available in the customer downloads section of CAMWorks website. MP 4 for SE was released earlier this month and it had the fix needed to get assemblies up and running inside CW4SE so we are in the final days of the wait for assemblies capabilities in CW4SE. I expect within a couple of weeks this last remaining hurdle of integration will be jumped for those of you waiting for this. Busy downloading the update now and if any glitches show up I will comment. Otherwise assume all is well.

In another note. I have decided that the correct way to begin using the Tech Data Base is to go into it and into the mill tools section for instance and do the following. I use three flute and five flute tools almost exclusively and four fluters for ball end mills. There are many MANY hundreds of silly tools in there and all come checked for use and so you are doomed to things you never use showing up all the time automatically when you generate your operation plan. Look at the following silly stuff Geometric leaves in there for instance.
TDB tools

The second column is labeled “ON”. Just start from the top and keep going and uncheck pretty much everything. I saved a few ball mills and insert cutters but nothing else since this shop never uses all this junk. Add your own tools of preference at this time. I think out of perhaps a couple thousand tools some programmer dude who never cut parts put in there I saved maybe 25 or so. But now at least the TDB is going to start looking more closely at tools I intend to use. This is not the complete answer here but it is a start to fixing this bad tool library mess Geometric ships. While you are in there you might as well change the degree of angle for all the drill bits to. I use nothing but 135 degree split points and sadly the Geometric drill data base is exclusively 118 degree. So go through and fix this to.

I make a separate folder labeled “ENGLISH DAVE BASIC” for these updates and save it to “C:\CAMWorksForSolidEdgeData\CAMWorks2014x64ForSolidEdge” in the “LANG” folder. When you are done doing this open up the TDB and click the Maintenance tab and link to your new folder but leave the old “ENGLISH” folder there and don’t mess with it. Edit the new folder you have created by the way and not the old one which is a sort of backup of last resort.

I would also save save a copy of your new file edits independently somewhere else and keep it handy. I have read stories about version and SP updates that dump your hard work. To prevent this an independent copy can always be used and linked so there is no excuse for this to ever be more than an inconvenience at worst.

Anyone with some tips and tricks on how to tame this TDB mess I will gladly post it here if you are willing to send it in. Supposedly Geometric is going to fix these libraries but I don’t think it is very important to them so be resigned to at least a year or more before anything of significance shows up here. Otherwise you get to read what I come up with for better or worse.

By the way, the internal code is now the same for both SE and SW flavors so the only difference is how it interfaces with the two programs. ALL the CAMWorks stuff for both like the TDB are identical and so I welcome and encourage SolidWorks users who use CAMWorks and feel they have something to contribute to do so.

Micheal Buchli’s “Camworks Handbook 2014” is now out and I recommend it for any user of CAMWorks. Get the PDF version online and it has like 80 minutes of imbedded video and it is the best $50.00 you will spend for training anywhere. The Tutorial section for CAMWorks is also quite good so between the two of these save some money and fire your VAR when he shows up with those $$$$$$$$ classes. Now if your VAR offers $$ classes that might be another story but I don’t know any VAR’s that do $$ training. And of course make YouTube your friend.

I want to remind SE users that there is a video creating and uploading to YouTube tool right in SE and even though Siemens officialdom has forgot it you should not. Use this tool and help your peers walk through the ins and outs of your program of choice.

YouTube link

The Autodesk Juggernaut Starts Rolling

One of the things that started my sojourn into blogging was interest in CAD and CAM in general. This of course means interest in topics besides my CAD CAM flavors of personal choice and I have always watched what others are doing. The cloud has in many ways been tied for equal interest with software as it may have such a profound effect upon how we do business in the future for those who foolishly go there. The other side of the coin which was alarming to me and the single largest reason I have had for posting bad things about Autodesk and Dassault’s Solid Works was the idea that they were going to try to force the cloud upon users whether they wanted it or not. I believe that if this paradigm were to be proven successful that other companies would probably follow this path to if vendor and cloud lock in with forced subscription only models for these two companies proves to be successful. Other than that the software from these two is what it is and if they dump this cloud garbage I would not have a whole lot to say about them because at that time they would not represent a potential threat to my future anymore.

Today just for the heck of it I went to this Autodesk site. http://cam.autodesk.com/pricing

Autodesk Juggernaut

Now I have to admit that this is the first real evidence I have found that the cloud is not inevitable here contrary to the statements made by Carl Bass. It would serve him well I think to clarify just what really is going to happen here. But at least at this current time cloud and not cloud are available. But what most impressed me were the we want you as customers prices. And per comments from Autodesk regarding a question from Al Dean the other day that Delcams PowerShape had technology in it including Direct Editing that would be incorporated into future versions of Inventor.

Autodesk is gearing up here for conquest. Look at the prices for just HSMWorks on this web page and it is the same as the prices will be for Inventor HSM. Except that HSMWorks will be + your full price seat of Solid Works and I would imagine two maintenance payments per year. If Autodesk really does a good job of integrating direct editing and other needed capabilities into Inventor and they make it the equal of Solid Edge or Solid Works and maintain this pricing it will be hands down the value leader in mid range MCAD and CAM combos.

I like HSMWorks. The Tech data base in Camworks IF you spent the time to implement all the stuff needed to make it work will get you quick toolpaths on most of your parts. As a matter of fact it is the best out there for Feature recognition but set up is a fairly involved process. Volumill is the very best HSM strategy out there right now and HSMWorks does not license it so plus another one for CAMWorks. HSMWorks does not offer these two things but I have to say that for those shops that just want good tool paths quick to learn and not cumbersome to set up HSMWorks is pretty darned good. They also have their own version of HSM which is capable. A friend of mine close by has one of those pressure cooker job shops and he swears by it and does a lot of different stuff each day. To be honest HSMWorks was my first choice for integration with SE back when I was asked to look at CAM programs for possible integration with SE.

In this day and time with each dollar counting more and more I believe that if Autodesk keeps permanent seats available this combination of Inventor HSM is going to be tough to beat as value leader. Now I presume that they intend to make Inventor into being more capable. But even if they don’t it is still way cheap and for that kind of money many will make the choice to just deal with a cam program that is not fully integrated with their CAD as long as Inventor handles imported parts well. Retail on SE and CW4SE up to 3 axis + Volumill 3 axis + turning is now right at $18,000.00 or $19,000.00 and there is not too much to be had in the deal zone off of that. My maintenance on this duo is going to be right at $4,000.00 per year and I bet yours will be to if you buy this. I don’t know what a full five axis and mill turn seat would cost from CW4SE but I suspect it would crowd you real close to $20,000.00 just like Mastercam would and probably be $4,000.00 per year on maintenance and with the additional maintenance from SE would add up to $5,500.00 or more per year. I also have no way of judging the relative capabilities of HSM versus CW4SE when you get into 4 and 5 axis and mill turn because I have never cut parts doing this. The labels however say these two can do it and I can say that after a trial of HSMWorks I did about two years ago if the capabilities of the rest of HSM are as good as the three axis stuff was it is more than capable.

That rumbling sound from down the road and just over the hill where you can’t quite see it yet just might be the Autodesk Jugernaught heading straight for you.

UPDATE 2-14
I have been told that the maintenance for the inventor and HSMWorks combo is 11 or 12% per year. This gets back to the idea of compelling potential customers to consider you and to keeping customers as customers with reasonable prices. Money is money and as a small business man my bottom line is more important to me than Siemens or Geometrics. So we have for new customers with SE and CW4SE to get what I have will be $18,000.00 plus $4,000.00 per year and a cam program I am getting increasingly irritated with. I don’t think I like this TDB and I would rather have templates if I were to be interested in automation at all. I am hoping someone shows me how to work the way I want to work with CW4SE and I will be all smiles soon. Then there is the $9,990.00 price above for cad and cam and only say $1,200.00 per year and I get a cam program that does things the way I want it to. I have to admit to sitting here and thinking real hard about where my future money will go because the payback with this HSM stuff is three years based on my recurring costs with SE CW4SE.Then I would have annual costs of one third what I will have if I continue the SE CW4SE path I am on. It is my money and it does have to be earned if you want some of it. I have a lot of thoughts wandering around in my mind right now that I never thought I would have three months ago. If Autodesk promises to maintain desktop permanent seats indefinitely and I feel I can trust them to do so I may just buy into it. Truthfully CAM is the most important part of my business in some ways because I may only design something once but make thousands of them afterwards. It is just as important for my CAM to work right as my CAD because I am a manufacturer and the recurring costs are a part of my profit picture. I have to admit that when my must pay maintenance jumped over 4G recently it was a wake up call that began to ask the question do you really want to be here.

The Destructive Siemens Corporate Mindset

Before this post begins some thoughts that have been circulating in my mind are going to be commented on. I held this from posting for a few days because sometimes I write stuff and for various reasons never post it. Will this be counterproductive to what I wish to achieve? Do I really know enough about the situation to put my opinion out there and not look stupid? Recently I had to reconsider my hubris towards John Fox because it is darned hard to get at the truth many times. When you have a blog and people know you do and you say it like you see it some doors open and others close. At times you have to ask why is this person even speaking to me and what is their agenda? Will I be stepping on toes I should not be or causing more problems than solving?

There are some in upper SE/Siemens management I trust to tell me within reason what is going on. There are times though that this is accompanied with admonitions not to speak about it so I don’t. But at least this kind of information allows me to concentrate on things that are not being worked on and bypass things that the public may think are not being worked on but I know they are. Publicity and Marketing is a kind of never-never land for me with Siemens and SE. There are changes but it is SO glacial. Some very good and concerned individuals fight the good fight and each little increment of forced change for the better takes more effort than can be imagined. That these things have to be fought for boggles my mind since all it would do would be to increase sales which in my silly little world is a good thing. I take my hat off to two individuals in particular, you know who you are, and I am thankful for their works in the trenches. At least I am seeing ads and mentions of SE fairly regularly now although at a subdued level. And there is a philosophical change in how SE is to be marketed which I see evidence of in realty but can’t talk about yet.

It seems as though campaigns are thought up and then nearly still-born and quickly fade away and the sounds of numerous crickets takes center stage again. No consistency and no long-term planning. The very idea of a consistent themed multi-year campaign to pursue a goal is an alien concept. So I think long and hard about who to blame for this. The SE guys are under the auspices of Siemens so therefore the true root of the problems is with Siemens corporate and not SE. Just like it was when SE was under UGS. I know some long time employees and some relatively new ones that have great ideas that never see the light of day. So rather than trying to figure out exactly who and where the problems stem from I have made a decision. The people at the very top of Marketing and Publicity and Social Media by the positions they hold are the ones I am going to blame from now on.

This is on their watch and a few scenarios come to mind. First is that they are perfect examples of the Peter Principle. Second is that they know things are not right but to chicken to fight or don’t know how to fight for what is right. The third is that they are a part of corporate culture that thrives on meetings that never go anywhere and never produce much except the time of the next meeting. I sometimes wonder if their idea of productivity is measured by the sheer number of meetings an individual or department can create and not on actual worthwhile results.For example the idea of having an equivalent of the SW CWSE for SE users has come up again. So it gets talked to death and extraordinarily stupid objections like won’t we be liable if we certify someone and they screw up are tossed up. Quite frankly my opinion is that these types of objections are merely justifications for doing nothing from people who don’t want to be bothered with having to do something. There are always tons of reasons for why we can’t do something and never ones on how to make it happen. This I have personally witnessed. And then of course we get to have many more meetings to discuss all the ramifications of these objections. These people could not piss in a pot without a meeting. Fact is there are so many certifications out there that the idea that this was even brought up boggles my mind and certifications are an indication of ability not a guarantee and they have to know this. This third category is by far the worst and it is the one I fear has entrenched itself. I conclude therefore that the three individuals mentioned below by virtue of their positions are the chief contributors to or enablers continuing the problem.

I sincerely hope that someone in authority over them thinks about what this trio and more importantly what this corporate mindset they represent has cost Siemens in the last three or four years since Dassault has begun self-immolation of SW. Gentleman, if you read this can you dispute the minimum lost potential numbers I bring up below? Further do you think in this day and time you could have used this extra $125,000,000.00+ somewhere like perhaps on your balance sheet? Your own people are stabbing you in the back.

On to the post as written on 1-29-14

Heading into this SWW 2014 convention provides opportunity for those with the ability to plan ahead. Sadly this does not appear to be the case with some companies and so I have some questions for David “Moe” Taylor, Chris “Curly” Kelley and Jeff “Larry” Nercesian, Siemens Publicity, Marketing and Social Media wonks and covert agents of SMOTHER. What sort of plans if any have you made to capitalize on this marvelous opportunity Dassault has given you once again? Do you intend as the heavyweight Siemens PR Marketing and Publicity tag team champions to win once again by just not showing up to defend the belt? How many years has it been now since Dassault has decided to initiate their self destruct program and you refusing to take advantage of it? I count three years of golden opportunities that can’t be recaptured and were pretty much wasted. Do you have somewhere in your cloistered little world views any desire to be victorious or do you intend to just sit on your rears and do nothing again? Perhaps Siemens could just fire you all and come out ahead. Heaven only knows that as far as I am concerned not having your three spots filled with the caliber of talent you seem to deliver would be more beneficial than having cash sucking pot holes in the way of progress on the road to victory for yet another year and squandered opportunity.

I am glad you asked, since I know you really care about my opinion, just what got Dave wound up again today. Well check this out.

Autodesk shrewd marketing

Then read this if your collective Attention Deficit Disorders will let you get through the whole article.

http://solidsmack.com/cad-design-news/need-know-solidworks-mechanical-conceptual-future-solidworks/

How is it that Autodesk has all those yummy ads there at just the right time? Some people can evidently figure out there are some opportunities here. Now read all the comments and count how many different programs are mentioned as of 1-29 at 10:43 PM. How is it that Solid Edge is not counted in this number?

I probably will never talk in quite these hostile terms again about marketing and publicity for Siemens but today I am mad. You long-term grossly incompetent individuals appear to once again have a greater desire for familiar failure you have grown accustomed to as long-term employees than a desire to achieve victory over your competitors. Hey wait a minute, you do realize that Dassault IS your competitor don’t you??

And you Mr Kelley have today a post about Wanna. Mr esteemed Senior Director of Online Marketing and Customer Advocacy Kelly I am trying to figure out what wanna really means in your world. Don’t wanna win, don’t wanna do my job, do wanna get my paycheck. Could you please tell me why once again after years of this nonsense and considering your position the apparent policy is to pursue failure once again? Is it because you wanna it this way?

All three of you by your job titles are failures as far as I am concerned. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that SE should have tens of thousands of additional subscribers if people like you just did what you were paid to do competently. Are you holdovers from the esteemed school of Bruce Boes Marketing theories? I am beginning to wonder if instead you were the clowns that thought up that whole Velocity mess. And I don’t want to hear any self exonerating defense offered about rules and regulations and finger-pointing bleats about why things can’t be done. I heard enough of that garbage from that scared of his own shadow Cubical Guy in Huntsville. He might not be in a position to correct things BUT the three of you are. If you have the intelligence to discern that things are not right and you do not fight to make it right you are on the side of WRONG. I am not sure you three even realize this though and I struggle to try to fathom just what goes through your minds and just what you think is proper and sufficient to capably fullfill your job requirements.

By my math you all are in large part responsible for the loss to Siemens of way over $100,000,000.00 in sales volume. Figure $5,000.00 as a nice even round number that is not the cheapest but certainly far from the most expensive seat of SE times 20,000 yields 100M. Now add to this one years maintenance of say 20,000 x $1,250.00 brings the total to $125,000,000.00 lost sales your incompetence has contributed to Siemens bottom line. And of course we are not getting into any ancillary sales that typically would accompany this. Lets say that 5000 SE users decide to get Camworks. Retail on my particular flavor was $13,500.00 and would be pretty typical. I come up with a grand total of $125,000,000.00 that your Marketing and Publicity and Social media has cost Siemens and some part of an additional $67,500,000.00 from Camworks and you Larry, Curly and Moe by your titles are right square in the positions that have caused this abject failure to produce. Yes I know that technically Camworks is not a Siemens product but you benefit through association financially I just don’t know how much. The few times I have brought this up with Siemens people I am dissed with HEY that’s not OUR product. Are you people to stupid to see the community of aps connection and to dumb to see how it has benefited Solid Works over the years? CAMWorks is guilty of poor marketing too but I tend to think this may be because they stretched a little past their limit to produce CW4SE and they can’t do much right now. This clearly is not Siemens problem.

I think it is worthwhile to put these numbers out there. They are not fantasy numbers and I think it is worthwhile to quantify the damage you have helped to create. I wanna see something happen this year besides another last-minute frenzy to get half-baked short-lived crap done for the University and then the rest of the year slides into oblivion AGAIN.

Let me ask you three something. Do you think that the apathetic user base and community just might stem in part from no expectations of worthwhile things from you guys? We users in general love the software itself but outside of that you give us nothing to rally around or be proud of. Where users have been shown something real like the University they have responded. Somehow I have to think this was taken out of your hands and that is why it works. And you bring this loser attitude to sales and marketing and we see how well that has worked. Way to go wannabes. There, another kind of wanna.

PS, by the way since you may not grok this I will fill you in on something. This extra 125M+ was the icing on the cake that you all helped Siemens to lose because there were no additional developmental costs involved here. Just an ad and promotion budget you either would not fight for or were too incompetent to demonstrate the value of or unable to develop a cogent strategy for marketing SE.

Wannabes, another kind of wanna for sure.