Tag Archives: 3d design

Solid Edge University 2013 and Manufacturing

There are times where knowing about things and not being able to talk about them is a mixed blessing. It is a privilege to be told and shown things in confidence. But it is a PITA when you know you have good things to share but can’t until the OK to talk is given. Especially when you have a blog and would love to get the word out.

Back in Solid Edge University 2012 there were a few things shown and integrated CAM for the future was one of them. It was public then and still is but that is about all we can say about it. Today however I was given a teaser video and with great delight I will share it with you.

http://youtu.be/X-qPOaQ4-7o

I am excited, I know how droll can you be when software excites you, but I am and you have a clue why now. This is only one of other things that will happen at SEU2013. There is a philosophical shift at Solid Edge towards a complete manufacturing ecosphere and an emphasis on design to manufacture for engineering professionals and companies large and small. They have a plan and are adhering to it to be the best mid range MCAD solution in the world and this will now include integrated applications that will allow for design and then to parts out of your door to customers. After all one of the largest manufacturing conglomerates in the world, Siemens, bought UGS (NX and SE and the rest that goes with them) with the intent to use it to enhance their own production and design. I think better than any other major CADCAM software writing company out there these guys understand and work towards real world efficiency and we get to benefit from this as software customers.

OH, and can I say with complete confidence there are NO CLOUDS in our future and no kernel changes either. Life is good when you know where your software of choice is headed and their leadership tells you so in plain English and then shows you with their actions they mean what they say. How refreshing in this day and time to deal with people who put their cards on the table rather than a bunch of obfuscatory PR corporate leader BS meant to gull you into places your companies can’t really afford to be.

There will only be one time where it can all come together for Solid Edge and this year will be it. If you can possibly be there I would most certainly advise it. Hope to see you there!

http://www.siemens.com/plm/solidedgeu

Dropbox Now a Pervasive Cloud Security Breach for Your Corporate Data

Oleg Shilovitsky responded to my post on Intel’s position on the cloud. In his response I was a bit floored to realize what a danger employee rebellion has become and the obvious lack of security methodology at many places that would allow this to even happen. Here is an article he wrote about this.

PLM Cloud Concerns and Dropbox Reality for Engineers

As an aside here I am coming to the conclusion that with the advent of Google Glass creating a whole new category of corporate espionage potential not only will you have to prevent “Glassholes” at work you should probably terminate “Bring Your Own Devices” too. But this is a separate issue that will have to be enforced by any security conscious company. As a philosophical thing here I am appalled at the idea of Google Glass and the erosion of privacy both for people and companies this abomination represents. The jeopardy Glassholes represent in so many ways staggers the imagination. Just like street view but only on steroids and following you everywhere and anywhere you are whatever you are doing and a Glasshole is present in public in private and at the workplace. And somewhere Google has a record of everything and don’t doubt for one second that the audio and visual recording capabilities of this stuff will be used by Google when the wearer does not request it. Or a hack job from somewhere will turn it on at demand from an external source just like the one for the iPhones a while back. Just like Adobe did by enabling audio and camera recordings without asking permission to do so a while back. The singular common preventable problem here is access to external elements like the internet or cell phone networks

What I address here today is yet another reason to prohibit any design and manufacturing data access to the cloud and apparently the only method that is going to work is complete isolation from the peril the cloud represents. Look, Dropbox is a cloud thing on cloud servers and you read the fine print and they make no guarantees of security and there will be nothing to make your IP loss whole to compensate your company for it’s loss. It is just another convenience for people to use for file transfers that sadly happens to be just another shopping cart for whomsoever will and has the talent to do so. Verizon does a study on this called Data Breach Investigations Here is one http://www.verizonenterprise.com/resources/reports/rp_data-breach-investigations-report-2012_en_xg.pdf

Please note the graph on page 16.

The vast, like 98% or so, of your clear and present danger according to them is external. While they don’t break it down this specifically I would assume that employees using Dropbox and the data being hacked from Dropbox would constitute itself in the external threat category even though it’s origin was an employee. But truthfully it’s origin was that this employee had access to the cloud with your data and the only method of prevention would have been NO CLOUD ACCESS AND NO ACCESS TO ANY EXTERNAL NETWORK. I question the 98% figure as seeming to be high but have no way of doing so with knowledge so I am going to have to accept their numbers.

Add yet another way to the myriad of ways that the cloud is your enemies best friend and your competitors best expenditure of “Research and Developement” funds.

Intel Rejects Cloud for Design and Manufacturing Data

I have been writing about the fraudulent nature of the promises of any CAD (And CAM as far as that goes!) on the Cloud company for a couple of years now. My real interest began when Dassault decided they were going to gut the security of every one of their clients by forcing the use of the cloud. Or at least that was the stated intent at the time as they attempted to paint a pretty picture of how things would be for those foolish enough to buy into this. http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2011/01/41questionsaboutthecloud.html

Now I know I have discussed this at length before and I have quoted the above article before. But it bears repeating here that basically none of these questions have been directly answered by any CAD or CAM on the cloud company. I feel they know these are not solvable problems right now so rather than admit this they just won’t talk about it. Those of you in the real world outside of the corporate boardrooms might even go so far as to say deliberate deceptions would be the right term and I think so to. The idea that single threaded applications can’t work better in the cloud where there are hundreds of cores available for your use is swept under the carpet. Instead we hear the cloud is a wonderful thing and no one bothers to qualify what he says. Indeed if they were honest they would say that this CAD cloud thing is applicable to FEA and rendering only and is dependent upon your internet connection quality and has gobs of charges waiting in the back ground. That single thread is still that and what they offer does not fix this. But you can still rent hundreds of cores if you wish. And they will make sure it ends up costing you more in the long run because it is all about the money and not about you.

Every once in a while I see an article I consider quite powerful for the viewpoint I subscribe to regarding the cloud. Today I bring you one from Intel CIO Kim Stevenson. http://www.zdnet.com/intel-cio-kim-stevenson-on-big-data-openstack-women-in-it-7000014221/

I think it bears repeating a bit of it here.
“•Design: “Silicon design will never go out to the cloud. That’s our core IP,” said Stevenson. She added that no cloud service level agreement or chargeback would ever compensate for Intel’s intellectual property being leaked. Instead, product design runs on a high performance computing grid that’s internal.
•Manufacturing: Manufacturing is another area that won’t be put into the cloud. The information is housed in small data centers near the manufacturing site and later aggregated.”

Now I am going to ask publically of Dassault and Autodesk these questions.
If Intel can’t protect it’s data online how will you be able to do so?
If chargebacks won’t cover Intel’s proprietary information losses how can you cover CAD and manufacturing data losses for the customers you have and want to force onto the cloud?

Last but not least is why do the representatives from the top down from Dassault and Autodesk blatantly lie about and or ignore the various egregious aspects of the cloud and expect to get a free pass on this? Now I say they lie deliberately and with intent as I refuse to believe that all these things I find in public domain as news they are unaware of. Deliberate omission of information is after all a method of lying isn’t it? And they do refuse to make whole anyone using the cloud and their software from any damages that result. Read the TOS for Fusion 360 as an example. What is left is for CAD and CAM customers to start considering the integrity with which their CAD software suppliers are treating them. If you are using Dassault or Autodesk products and they force you to the cloud in any way to use their products they quite clearly have contempt for you as a customer and only see you as chattel dollar signs. If you are contemplating using ANY CAD or CAM program that forces your data to the cloud from anyone you are in jeapordy. I mention Dassault and Autodesk because their actions to force users into an insecure paradigm for whatever reason causes them to lead the charge here.

As a fine example of corporate deception and double speaking I present Autodesk’s Fusion 360 TOS. In particular pay attention to sections 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 and it tells you all you need to know of the integrity of Autodesk and how they will stand behind their customers. This is the current version from 3/13/13
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=21310328
For Dassault we have http://www.3ds.com/terms-of-use/ While I did not spend a whole lot of time digging I could find nothing on Mechanical Conceptual and I suppose this is because it is not out there yet for the public. But in any case pay attention to the weasel words in section 9. I am sure you will find them amusing as I did.

Is it any wonder with the integrity of the cloud service offering companies that Intel does not want their intellectual properties or their manufacturing data to reside there? I find these comments from Intel CIO Kim Stevenson to be incredibly revealing and directly damning against Dassault and Autodesk from an unimpeachable source they can’t contradict. The lawyers that Dassault and Autodesk employ agree totally with Kim Stevenson and thus these onerous evasions of responsibility from them to any customer who uses cloud based whatever from these guys.

An interesting commentary I read recently stated that when us old fuddy-duddy users who still believed in things like autonomy and personal control over our affairs, data and destiny were replaced by the young guys who were so electronically connected in every area of their lives and could care less about fuddy-duddy concerns this cloud would work. Work for who dare I ask? Somehow I think that when even these superior mentality uber-connected cutting edge near cyborg wannabes get screwed enough by these cloud companies they to will reject this mess. Nothing like a little real life medicine to cure naivety I always said and thus will die the current equivalent of the Dot Com frauds of the late 90’s.

Look people, in particular those of you with Dassault or Autodesk or considering them or any other CAD CAM company that would force you to the cloud. Can you afford to deal with companies that treat your lifeblood with such disdain? Intel clearly thinks not and so should you in my opinion.

The Absurdity of Linkedin Endorsements

I get occasional emails which state that I have been endorsed for skills from LinkedIn. Now not many show up in my about me because I suppose I don’t reply or reciprocate or approve or something. So I click on the latest endorsement today and it does not show up either but I am asked to approve the list of people that show up for skills. I have to say that many of them I don’t personally know and I don’t have a clue as to what most of them can really can do. Others I do know and could easily endorse them and it would have meaning because I have personal experience with them that would bequeath credibility to the endorsement.

However it has become a game with entirely to many individuals running around collecting endorsements and way to many endorsements being given as a simple courtesy to those who endorsed you even though many times no one knows what the other can truly do. Now as proof of this I offer two situations I am familiar with. I have received endorsements for machining and design and CAD and CAM and manufacturing skills. From people who know me through my blog or by reputation even though only a few of these have actually seen anything I have done and can speak truthfully about skill levels. And that presumes that they have the knowledge in that particular discipline they endorse me for so that the endorsement would be valid.

Then we have this guy. Jon Banquer is proof to me of how frivolous LinkedIn endorsements have become. Go look at his Skills and Expertise list and there are gobs of endorsements from all over the map from people who have never seen his work in any way. They have never seen any evidence the company he claims to own is real. No files no work, just nothing. But yet lots of endorsements and I dare say the majority happened because he endorsed others. Reciprocity is the polite LinkedIn thing to do after all.

So we have the professional equivalent of Facebook’s “Farmville” where social networks are created and driven so that some how some way it can be monetized in the future. With Farmville I remember my wife playing it and then one day in order to have a really cool farm you had to start buying things. I laughed and call me silly if you want but I have prohibited my family from posting things about me and pictures of me there. There is serious data mining going on with Facebook and continuous chicanery with your personal information because they HAVE to make money and your personal data is how they will do it. Everything you put there is for sale. Now LinkedIn is I believe going through the same process and working on developing large user networks. Ones that may have very little basis in truth in some cases but it does connect dots and it does get large groups of people in the system for future monetization. A little more profit potential than Farmville per user because in many cases the individuals at LinkedIn are professionals of some sort and therefore presumably in a place of influence for who buys or uses what. A list for sale to advertisers and sales types would be another way of stating it.

Sad thing is that so much of the stuff in endorsements is bogus that it is of itself revealing of the monetizing principle which has replace true value as people scramble to recreate the wealth the web can represent. Just like the unproven models with the dot com bust that fleeced many of money today I believe we see the replacement of dot com fraud. It is social whatever where getting numbers is king and where getting as an investor true verifiable data is next to impossible. An amusing offshoot of this is click fraud companies who create bogus clicks. Or Google pulling shenanigans with word search and rank to benefit themselves. Or the fabulous wealth of Facebook’s initial public offering without proof it could earn that kind of money.

So we have LinkedIn looking for ways to make their social network grow using less than honest measure to do so. LinkedIn is a valuable resource for finding people in some ways in that they do provide a network of connections that can be very beneficial. Sadly it is becoming less valuable over time as they introduce silly things like endorsements that are not verified in any way shape or form.

So to all of you who have sent me endorsements. Even though I know some of you personally and I know you have skills I just don’t bother participating because of the prevalence of endorsement fraud. Does not mean I don’t appreciate endorsements but I never solicit for them and I won’t reciprocate and now you know why.

It kind of reminds me of the Japan Tsunami videos. First you had the original video and author and then tons of people who would plagiarize them just to get view number counts however they could. Or Grabcad where models show up done by one and subsequently claimed as being done by others who wish to look like CAD gurus and get points or whatever someone thinks they gain by claiming what is not theirs to be theirs. Or Jon Banquer CADCAM’s premier troll who collects them to look authoritative but can’t provide any files or finished work for public or peer review.

Sorry LinkedIn but you have flopped on this one and it is costing you credibility even though it will over time probably help you pay bills.

Solid Works Users, Send Me Your Problem Files

typical Solid Works fail

I have mentioned this and no one has taken this seriously yet so I am going to try again. I am looking for MCAD files from Solid Works users that fall into the following categories. Problems creating it in SW, problem with editing or families of parts in SW and last but not least imports that fail in SW. It is my intent to create videos utilizing these files and demonstrating how it can be done with data imported as dumb solids from Solid Works in Solid Edge. I have always felt that there is nothing better than using actual parts to work with over canned demos all slick and polished from Siemens. So my mission, and I hope some of you will be so kind as to oblige me, is to get files from you so I can create some videos.

HEY, worst case scenario is that if it is of interest to you, you can see how someone else using a different program solves the same problems you face. Please leave a reply here and I will get back to you with contact information.

Here is a specific example of what I am talking about. This part was sent to me by a member of the Huntsville Solid Edge User Group. For some reason I can’t fathom he is still strictly an ordered user in ST4. He had a lot of trouble with an imported step file and here I show him how to repair this using Synchronous in ST5. Basically like many history based or ordered users he eventually ended up rebuilding the part after fiddling with it for some time. Now I mention that this was not repairable in ordered in the video clip but I suppose it could be if one fiddled long enough or knew the cool tricks for doing so. My attempts there to get this done in ordered were brief and I went to Synchronous rather quickly where I knew I would not have to fool around. I do all my parts in Synchronous as it is just to quick and reliable for me to consider ordered or traditional history based stuff anymore. And to be honest here I have to sit down and remember just how to inflict the pain of straight ordered modeling upon myself and I spend little time doing so. There apparently are some real benefits to combining the two at times although I have never had a need to do so.

Five Free Spots Reserved for Qualified Solid Works Users at SEU 2013

OK folks the count down for ST6 is going quickly and at this end I am getting excited about what is coming. Of course there are the things some of us get to see and can’t talk about which of course makes the wait worse for us. We get to see the new toys or hear about them and then have to wait. Sometimes I think ignorance is bliss and maybe would be preferable to you can look but you can’t touch. Anyway that is the way it goes.

Solid Works is by any number metric the largest 3D MCAD modeler out there. They have become a part of a company that does not understand how the success of SW was part of a plan that listened to users and interacted with them. Today it is top down chaos with one thing said one month along with promises only to see a diametrically opposed statement soon after and failures to deliver promised software or all this cloud goodness everyone is supposed to be in awe of. Naturally in a vacuum like this there will be something that comes along to fill it.

I prefer to think this over the next few years will be Solid Edge and while SW is not going away it’s market share will be severely cut. When technology advances as profoundly as it has with the implementation of Synchronous Technology in SE it is only a matter of time before clear advantages with direct editing will prove itself to doubters and there stands SW with nothing to offer.

Now part of the master plan for SE to acquire SW users is to make the change as painless as possible and in light of that I will copy what Dan Staples sent to me this morning.

“”We will waive the conference fee for the first five qualified individuals to sign up to participate in a one hour usability session. Qualifications: A minimum of two years using Solid Works in a production environment; no more than two hours prior hands-on experience with Solid Edge”

I will be adding information on who you contact for this but you guys over on the SW side of the fence who are interested have an opportunity here to attend SEU 2013 for free. Now I assume that since this was not specified you are responsible for lodging and travel. This is a chance to see exactly what the program is all about and meet the people employed with Siemens.

I believe that ST6 is when all the pieces of the puzzle will come together for SE and soon we will be looking at SW users and saying “you to will be assimilated” and many of you will. Better ways of doing things with methodology that can work with files from anywhere and not watch your stuff blow up all the time is a compelling argument to switch from the tired things you know and can work with to a far more productive way.

I also have an offer to SW users. I would like you to send me a problem file you have along with an explanation of why it fails in SW. It can be one you have created or one you have imported that you can’t easily work on and I want to make some videos showing how SE would work on the same part. I find there is nothing that beats working on someone’s problem part to show just exactly why your way is much more efficient. SO, five go to SEU2013 for free and send in your files and get some insight into a better way for free. Now on this parts file thing. Remember I am a guy that does design build for machinery, just like 90% or so of the MCAD world I would guess. You send me some sort of byzantine plastic tail light housing that in all likelihood is beyond my skill level I will try to find someone who can work on it. But for the 90% of you who do the same kind of work I do bring it on. Post a reply here and I will get you the contact info for the parts files.

Solid Edge Media and Academic Efforts Need Serious Revamp

You never quite know what to expect when you attend an event and sometimes the purpose of the event is only related to the thing that impresses you the most as you leave for better or worse. Sometime back I attended the Surfcam V6 rollout at the Barber Sports Museum. During one of the Truemill demonstrations the speaker asked how many there used Truemill. There were around 75 attendees and the vast majority were current users. THREE held their hands up and two were from the same company. I was absolutely floored at how such a powerful tool was studiously ignored by such a high percentage of users. Users who in many cases already owned the Truemill add on as a part of their CAM package but for whatever reason elected not to use something that could easily double their productivity and save on consumables to boot. It was almost like a certain level of capabilities and profit were sufficient and there was no desire to improve. The speaker was a bit shocked too and mentioned that they had failed to educate users and prove the benefits to them.

The first speaker at our user group meeting in Huntsville began speaking on Synchronous Tech and asked who all was using it there. Out of 21 actual users in attendance there I was the only one to hold my hand up. Now the really sad thing is that once we began the round table the use of ST was the primary topic of interest with Tips and Tricks a close second.

This leads me to what I wish to discuss and that is the failure of the promotional and Academic outreach side of Solid Edge. I don’t have a clue as to what in the world goes on in the minds of those who are in charge of this but for only one user out of a group of motivated users who chose to spend their own time to attend because they are interested in the software they use to be a user of ST is not acceptable. This is the premier element of Solid Edge and it is the true competitive advantage to both Siemens in gaining market share and SE users who become tremendously more productive by using it. HOW in the world is this not actively pushed by VARS and Siemens is beyond me. Where are the well trained individuals who will call on various customers and arrange to have demos at the place of use to show both management and users of the profound benefits. I do mean profound. I sat there thinking of how crippled user output was because no one had sat down with them and SHOWN them what ST truly means as a liberating tool for CAD creation.

Now one of the reasons for non adoption was ‘my professor teaches us only in Ordered”. I have to admit my jaw dropped on this one and I can’t imagine a teacher who would not teach the best capabilities of the software to his students nor could I believe that Siemens had not checked in to see what the teaching staff was teaching only three miles away from the headquarters. Look, whoever is reading this let me fill you in on something. These students were HUNGRY for ST when they actually saw it being used for the first time. How in the world has this been allowed to happen? As a part of grants or academic site licenses Siemens needs to police what is being done with their products. It appalled me that here were students who were selectively being taught and the best parts were never discussed.

Of course the litany of comments from users about how hard it is to get their companies to switch over and we never have time and all the stuff we as users are familiar with. These are valid reasons. Now why are they valid? Because management has not been sufficiently exposed to the power of Synchronous they labor on in the idea that we already know ordered and we don’t need the headache of change. Kind of like we are happy because we have X% of profit and productivity and as long as we don’t know those metrics could be much better we will stay with what we are comfortable with. I daresay that not one serious effort has been made to have management sit down with Siemens after Siemens does a case study for them to prove the power to improve design time by adopting a new way. From families of parts to imported parts to edits that always happen over the life of a part and Siemens evidently has nothing going on to compel change through proof of efficiency using customer parts to prove this by.

I love to sit down with and Inventor or SolidWorks users and editing their parts in my program faster than they can and I mean by many times faster. There is no more compelling thing than proof and I just can’t grasp how this most powerful and compelling thing is not blasted out by Siemens at every possible opportunity. For my money SE is just flat out the best mid range MCAD program in the world and I spent money out of my own pocket as proof of this.

I am a perfect example of how Siemens should be doing this. Back in 2008 I am shopping for good MCAD and the choices have been narrowed down to Solid Works and Solid Edge. I have attended two demo days with SW at this point in time in Nashville. I had attended nothing for SE because, well because there was nothing then to attend. However, I get a call one day from a guy with a company that used to be the VAR for the Huntsville area. He describes ST1 and called me down there to have a look. This is what I saw. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bk5-1sZ6cY My mind took one look at this principle of direct editing and I could see so many ways this was what I had been looking for without knowing what I was looking for. BUT IT TOOK SOMEONE WHO COMPELLED ME AND USED MY PART TO PROVE HIS POINT TO ME. No canned demo by some sales jock showing the same tired official Siemens polished presentations but a user who took my part and proved the principle of ST to me in a way I could not ignore.

Solid Edge is the best midrange MCAD program in the world. There are things that will be here for ST6 that will eliminate any other software as a contender for utilitarian value king.

You guys need to kick someone in the butt and get them on the ball where the dissemination of the value of Solid Edge is concerned or you can still produce the best MCAD program in the world but still be second or third place in market share. If it were me I would be less patient with mediocre efforts and the apparent corporate satisfaction with the status quo.

Dave Ault signing off shaking his head in disbelief over how this can be allowed to continue. Throw this stupid Loco Motors thing in the dustbin and get real.

The New Normal or The Rudderless Ship, You pick which fits best.

There has been a phrase coined in the last two years to describe lousy economic conditions and no hope for significant positive change any time soon. It is basically a phrase used to describe negative things right now and negative harbingers for the future. The New Normal.

Apparently we have a New Normal for the cad world. The journey for Dassault into self immolation began a few years ago and became public when the grand announcement that all would go to the cloud and into the brave new world of the DSS future. Lots of hoopla about revolutionary new ways to do things and how it would all work flawlessly on the cloud and everything would be lovely.

The first day of SW2013 is in the books and what is remarkable is that after years of publicity and effort to produce CAD revolution we have instead the New Normal for Dassault. A twenty percent drop in attendees and I think reading comments from those there who are not part of the official SW/DSS blog squad it is clear why. Lack of hope for powerful product launches or announcements this year has fizzled enthusiasm in a big way for the product and attendance. I think Ralph Grabowski summed it up best with a comment on Deelips blog.

http://www.deelip.com/?p=8557#comments

“It is very disappointing that after six years of development, that the best Dassault Systemes can show is a few screen grabs. Not even a canned video!
Well, at least they announced the next delay in shipment. In that, they have been consistent.”

Further reading.

http://my.solidworks.com/#General One of the major announcements. Welcome to the world of CAD social media. Really this is one of the three big deals so far.

http://schnitgercorp.com/2013/01/21/solidworks-world-the-first-24-hours/ Monica comments and in part I quote. I am pretty amazed at how after some pretty fluffy bits for DSS she then brings up the mental image of users who want different things than the Dassault leadership does and that users may not want to tow the Dassualt iceberg around behind the software they thought they were going to get. At least this is how I interpret what she said.

“My bottom line from the first 24 hours? SolidWorks may be part of DS but is a very different animal. Lots to be proud of but not much swagger. Loyal, excited users who want to improve the world but aren’t committed to towing icebergs. An audience that listened to a brief 3D Experience message but doesn’t see it rocking their world any time soon. Resellers that are focused on the world of CAD and closely related solutions. In all, it’s a very different vibe than we had at the 3DEXPERIENCE Forum just a few months ago, a few miles away. Best of all, DS seems to realize that it’s got a great thing going here with SolidWorks and may, just may, be backing off a bit to let it evolve as it will.”

I like quotes. I tend to think all words mean things and you see truth or evasions with many shades of reality in between. Many of us grew up with the “What, me Worry” Alfred E. Neuman guy from “Mad Magazine” Maybe the following is a little over the top but I have such a hard time trying to figure out why one of the pre-eminent software companies in the world has such a profound disconnect from the reality of what their customers want. Years of promises and evasions and broken time lines from Dassault. So I bring you “Folle Magazine de Dassault” and here is the first article.

Introducing SolidWorks Mechanical Conceptual, a new way to jumpstart your design process

Look folks, is CGM the next kernel or no? What about Catia Lite? Is this new “SolidWorks Mechanical Conceptual” the new deal and the replacement for SW and does it have to work on the cloud? What about direct editing? Why are they talking again about unproven products rather than bringing beta tested proof of concept to the biggest annual SW conference? You read the above link and tell me I am wrong when I say the future Dassault wants for SW at this time is social media and cloud based group think stuff with out a single shred of evidence they can be made to be secure and work as promised. If I were a thinking Solid Works user I would be hopping mad over this patronizing and cavalier treatment and just what the heck have they been paying for anyway? Wasn’t CAD design software supposed to be about geometry solving the best way possible? Hate to say it Dassault but that still is the purview of autonomous seats, workstations and internal server networks that don’t go online and that’s why after all these years you still can’t make it work right.

This goes directly back to what is the corporate philosophy of the authors of the software you use to make a living. Do they have a coherent plan? Do they have a plan that includes your needs and desires? Are they honest with you about their direction and goals so you can rationally plan for your future? I read this market speak double dealing smoke screen stuff from Dassault (Sorry if you think this is a bit harsh but is it not true none the less?) that they put out to the public and expect you not only to believe but gladly embrace and pay for. Then I sit back and ponder the corporate and PR leadership mentality that evidently thinks their users are so stupid or captive that whatever drivel they put out as long as it is accompanied by many flowery adjectives and phrases they can get away with anything.

My opinion for what it is worth is that Dassault has to much pride or a true fantasy vision for the future and they are not going to back down until disaster profoundly strikes their sub numbers. How many years of successive failed concepts and failure to make this stuff work right on the cloud have already passed? And is this not still their goal reading the official press stuff? Read what they are saying and the smoke screen is there as they try the old end run gambit to fool their customers into doing what Dassault wants.

http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2011/01/41questionsaboutthecloud.html

This is an article from two years ago. I asked these questions going into the SW conference that year and to date none of these have been answered.

I have a question for all you Solid Works users. At what point in time do you consider the actions of Dassault towards gutting the software you bought into, years ago in many cases, the constant uncertainty and inability to deliver on any significant promises for years now, and their determination to do what the vast majority of you clearly do not want as reason to look elsewhere? If this years conference is not a wake up call I don’t know what would ever be. Get your life rafts prepared. Legacy files or not can you afford to be where your security and desires are ignored?

I think even if you do stay the legacy file thing is going to bite you in a big way. Don’t you know if Dassault could have produced Catia Lite on the CGM kernel (which they don’t seem to want to talk about this year) they would have? So you stay and you are still going to have legacy file problems as far as I am concerned when you have to translate from Parasolids to CGM.

The light in the Dassault train wreck tunnel is two years bigger with Alfred E. Neuman watching his iPad and not paying attention to the throttle. This whole thing just fascinates me. I can’t grasp how such a company as Dassault wants to self destruct one of their pre-eminent products. Unless of course their true unstated goal is to drift away from pure CAD creation with exacting parameters and drift into lesS precise social media based things. I still have not ruled out the possibility that Dassault looks at Facebook and Google and is seeking a way to participate in social media stuff which clearly can be wildly profitable. Just grasping at straws here to try to understand what appears to be corporate insanity on the surface. The only other and scarier thought is that they truly think they are visionaries and correct.

That will lead to future issues of “Folle Magazine de Dassault” no doubt. Tune in next year for more of the same I fear.

Ten Year Plan or No Plan, What Would You Prefer?

OK, I am going to take a stab at being an unpaid junior marketing guy for Solid Edge today. Really it is an easy job because the very nature of the difference between Dassault’s handling of Solid Works and Siemens handling of Solid Edge is huge. Now I am not talking PR here because basically it does not exist at Solid Edge when compared to Solid Works. In this area SW has a plan and SE seemingly does not. I am going to talk about where companies are headed with their products.

Sometimes you read things and you just have to respond. Matt Lombard http://www.dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=8244
has come up with two posts this past week that have inspired me. Both of his posts made reference to fear in the heart of Solid Works VARS and today we have this. After this web page was posted it was quickly removed from view.

http://www.3dvision.com/wordpress/2013/01/14/the-sky-is-not-falling/

Now the beauty of the web is once posted never gone and so the page lives on. The Sky Is Not Falling is a heck of a thing for an SW VAR to feel compelled to talk about just before SW2013. I can only imagine the flack his customers are giving him for him to post this topic.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vYjAGQcfZ58J:www.3dvision.com/wordpress/2013/01/14/the-sky-is-not-falling/+http://www.3dvision.com/wordpress/2013/01/14/the-sky-is-not-falling/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

MATT has amended this part of his post referencing The Sky is Not Falling and you may go there and read why at the first link. Obviously this was not written recently but it still was a topic this VAR thought to bring up so for that alone I will leave the reference and comments in. I think there are probably a number of VARS who wonder about a lot of things with Dassault.

So we have a VAR wondering why Solid Edge has an anemic nearly non-existent ad campaign against troubled Dassault and a VAR who does not want to feed the apprehension of nervous SW users. These two are related due to one thing and that is the plans Dassault has for it’s cash paying customers and the VARs stuck in the middle of this mess. Dassault is busy creating weird stuff like Minimoys and software to see how your grocery store shelves might look. How about the abortive attempts at things like N!FUZE and the Cloud?

Here we are two years later and the poor SW user still has no idea of the real plans for SW and indeed he has been in limbo since Jeff Death Ray whipped his blaster out and promised the end is nigh. There are verbal promises and no binding time frame commitments about the future of Parametric based SW. We read about Catia Lite. Lots of press releases with glowing marketspeak gobbledegook no user wants to hear accompanied by how many abortive products since 2010?

I think these are symptoms of a plan no one at Dassault corporate wants to talk about. Either because they are embarrassed at how much failure has accompanied their first stated time lines and product launches or because they are hoping to create a cloud based Catia Lite they can ease their customers into without bleeding to death. All of this is part of the cloud model whereby they hope to, in my opinion, force users into perpetual no permanent seats pay to play chattel for a number of reasons. Primarily more of your money in their pockets in ways that can’t be stopped until you leave them or maybe even as long as you want to use “your” intellectual property. By the way dear reader whose property are your creations if you have to pay someone for the privilege of using what you have created on the cloud hmmm?

So you say, how can you prove that Mr Dassault badmouthing guy! I don’t sit on the board at Dassault but I can read between the lines. SW has no direct editing capabilities to speak of and they are not going to have it on Siemens Parasolid Kernal. You are going to have to have this capability to survive at the top of the MCAD heap. Yes I know the Parasolid Kernal is sold in its entirety but if you think there are not goodies there that make Synchronous Tech work for NX and SE that are not for sale to competitors you are just plain silly. And just like Autodesk I think the desire for chattel is so great at the corporate level that they are willing to risk jeopardizing their companies future in this effort. They truly think the bother of switching will be so onerous that most will never leave. So to date their actions speak louder than their words and the actions are to switch SW to the CGM kernel and users to the cloud eliminating Siemens Kernal and user freedoms in one fell swoop.

SW users think about these things and so do the VARs who do things like pull the above article so as not to feed the fire with SW users. If you don’t want your customer to know what you really intend use the weapon of marketspeak and baffle them with bovine stuff. This is not the sign of a company that has an honest plan they intend talk about with you the CAD user.

It is kind of strange to talk to Karsten Newbury who is head of Solid Edge Velocity products for Siemens. He uses plain language totally bereft of all that marketing jargon and he either says this is what we intend to do or I can’t talk about that with you. But he is willing to share the TEN YEAR plan that Siemens expects it’s companies to operate by. There is no plan to switch kernals or go to the cloud. No gamification or any of that useless social media stuff. Look I am not putting the simple creation of basic CAD or viewing the same on gutless hand held devices in this social media category but rather this whole Experience thing which wants to propel you into an online community of some sort to create CAD. WOW not only CAD but all of your crowd sourcing buddies and Facebook friends will be there too with the internet leaking all your data left and right to hackers!! Who comes up with this junk for a business model anyway?

At this time I find only one basic philosophy and delivery model being planned for Solid Edge. To become the best mid range geometry creation MCAD program out there whose primary objectives ARE to have best in class direct editing, to solve geometry and not have to use the cloud to do it. The next is to have a complete manufacturing ecosphere in place where you never have to step outside of SE and it’s integrated partners to do it all. Of course NX has been there for some time.

This is a contrast that appeals to me. Do I pick software with no clear direction and contradictory statements about the future abounding and being forced to the cloud to boot. Or do I at the age of 59 buy a product whose goal is best in class geometry and where I know exactly what to expect until I retire with a cohesive corporate plan they will clearly lay out for me.

So Mr. marketing guru here is Dave’s whole cad user marketing strategy. Promote the truth in plain language of your direction and your goals for the software. Talk about the capabilities and integration of ancillary programs to make it all work end to end to manufacture by. No BS, no Cloud, permanent seats, no kernel change, and corporate stability. Show how direct editing allows me to edit parts from SW and Inventor easier than the creators in their own products with imported dumb solids.

Now I am going to mention PROE here briefly. I don’t know much of anything about them and neither do CAD users I know personally. We all know they exist and were the King of the hill at one time but basically nothing more. So I figure they are a legacy program living off of those who never bit the bullet to change. Kind of like what I figure the fate of future SW users will be. When I talk about major mid range MCAD companies I am talking about Dassault’s Solid Works, Autodesk’s Inventor and Siemen’s Solid Edge.

At this time even though their marketing department is in limbo only Solid Edge has the corporate planning stability that I need, security now and in the future I have to have by being allowed to work offline and management that actually wants to know and incorporate geometry creation capabilities users want. Whose plan do you want to buy into, yours or theirs?

I chose to buy into the company that buys into what I need for mine for now and the future. NOW MR Marketing Guy, that was not so hard after all was it?

So, Why Isnt Solid Edge Marketed Effectively?

Why Solid Edge remains so poorly marketed is a mystery to me. I can tell you this was a topic amongst users and VAR’s at SEU2012 and since then in private conversations I have had with these two groups. A common comment was why didn’t the dedication and planning evinced for SEU2012 bleed over into promoting Solid Edge to the MCAD software world in general?

Today I am reading over at Matt’s blog http://www.dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=8222#comment-3224672
some interesting comments upon Dassault and one reflects directly upon this lack of sales effort by Siemens or Solid Edge or just whoever is in charge of publicity. In part I quote “Our customers are calling with strange questions. It’s clear that the competition is taking advantage of the situation. If I were them, I’d be far more aggressive. Picking up another product to sell is not out of the question. DS has approached some of us with a new contract which looks like a bad business proposition for me in my position of uncertainty. I would not be surprised to see some resellers knuckle under and become essentially puppet organizations for DS. As a large value added reseller in the US, I can’t imagine that other channel organization owners are not thinking the same things that are going through my mind.”

So why is it that even competitors are asking why it is so quiet? We users ask this to with no answer and ponder the whole disconnect from reality. Here we believe in the software and the PR department does not and what is wrong with that picture? If it were me I would be finding out just who this is and chasing him and his customers down. This one disgruntled guy could be worth hundreds of seats and be a perfect referral to other VARS who are justifiably concerned for their future with Dassault. Instead here he sits evidently in a vacuum safe from the Siemens/SE PR department.

I am getting to the point where I believe these marketing whiz bangs with degrees need to return to reality and find out what appeals to users and make a plan. Then carry it out and then stay with it because once started it has to have longevity and frequency to be effective. Dassault has a bunch of 3DEXPERIENCE (never forget the all caps that is important) wonks who talk above the heads of their users and potential customers. Autodesk has guys that say dumb stuff like ”
Autodesk approaches strategy in a two-part process: Strategic Intent (“where we want to go”) and Strategic Realization (“how we will execute against the intent”). We are focused on The Autodesk Experience — How do all of our products and services work together in the cloud? As part of this, we spent A Year of Learning Dangerously where we learned a great deal about broad disruptive changes impacting the industries we serve:”.

No user has a clue what this guy meant but he is convinced it was worthwhile. So these guys have fruit baskets and bowls of nuts for PR directors in many cases but at least they are getting name recognition out there. For some reason the Solid Edge/Siemens PR department thinks I guess that sales can work through osmosis or telepathy or something. Write the software and They Will Come I guess. Anything but what has proven to work else where in their target market.

Look guys, it is a New Year and time to step up to the plate and CRUSH Dassault like you ought to know you can. You do know this and believe this don’t you? Act like it then. Dassault is doing everything they can to self destruct and you guys do nothing meaningful with this golden opportunity. Even your competition wonders why Solid Edge is not interested enough to at least communicate with and offer deals to all the Solid Works user refugees looking for life rafts. I don’t get it and I don’t know one person who does but then I am not in charge of PR. Considering what I see with Dassault and Autodesk and Solid Edge I have to really wonder how these PR guys are picked.

I can guess that being a simple minded user who would consider utility and cost savings promotions and stability of the software’s future direction as paramount to a cohesive ad campaign I am most certainly not qualified to be there.

Look, can I say this, well I am not asking actually. This conquest of Dassault is a time limited offer. If you do not get busy someone else will and it is your own future you compromise with this stubborn refusal to get busy with PR in a meaningful way.

Time to go back to work and stop pondering the byzantine logic of PR specialists.