Tag Archives: direct editing

Solid Edge University 2013 BE THERE

Posted on May 3, 2013 | 2 comments

Let me take a moment of your time here to just mention a few things. In many ways what I had hoped for with SE has been delayed for a few years or has never been a part of SE to begin with. There are things I can’t talk about so let me just say this. I fully expect SEU2013 to be everything I could hope for and more in every area. This year SE will have a complete foundation to really launch itself over the course of the next few years to be the next CAD king.

I have wanted this before but this time I am fully expecting it to begin. Where SEU Huntsville was exciting because the SE community was re-established and SEU 2012 Nashville saw it double in size this event in Cincinnati will eclipse anything held for SE over it’s entire history. This year SE begins a new chapter as a complete design to manufacturing ecosystem in every way and there will only be one event like this in the history of SE. There will be much bigger events in the future but this one will be the beginning of the real deal for SE and if you can possibly be there I think you will be well rewarded.

When you write you quite often look for zingers or persuasive words to convey your point of view. I don’t have any this time and all I am putting here in this post is what I believe will be the future of SE and in particular the significance of SEU 2013 to this future.  I invite you to be a part of this.

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

2 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Dropbox Now a Pervasive Cloud Security Breach for Your Corporate Data

Posted on April 25, 2013 | 1 comment

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.

1 Comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

The Absurdity of Linkedin Endorsements

Posted on April 8, 2013 | 5 comments

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.

5 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , ,

Solid Works Users, Send Me Your Problem Files

Posted on March 25, 2013 | 8 comments

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.

8 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

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

Posted on March 22, 2013 | Leave a comment

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.

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Solid Edge Media and Academic Efforts Need Serious Revamp

Posted on February 14, 2013 | 13 comments

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.

13 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

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

Posted on January 22, 2013 | 6 comments

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.

6 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , ,

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

Posted on January 15, 2013 | Leave a comment

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?

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Solid Edge Social Community

Posted on January 7, 2013 | 2 comments

I want to announce the formation of the Solid Edge Social Community. Here is the link to it. http://www.soliddna.com/SEcommunity
This has been started by Luc Poulin of SolidDNA who is linked to here at the sidebar.

I think it bears a bit of commentary as to who Luc is and why you should go there if you have an interest in Solid Edge. I first met Luc at PLM World in Nashville 2009 where he was one of 37 Solid Edge attendees. Well before there was a re-establishment of the new SE community he had an interest and was there on his own dime. He has been an active part of the revival of the Solid Edge community not so much with his web sites as with his prolific technical support and how to’s which show up on a regular basis at the Siemens BBS forums and pretty much where ever SE users congregate. Behind the scenes he has been of material help to people like myself, Matt Lombard and many others on how to do things or solve problems.

While I am involved in the use of SE and helping to create a community for users I have never considered myself an expert user of Solid Edge. My business does not require me to be and my plate is full enough that I learn what I need. Luc on the other hand IS an expert and is well regarded by people who go as far back as Solid Edge V1.

He has toyed with the idea of creating a community forum for some time now that would be open to the public that would be geared towards anyone who was interested. I remember discussing stuff like this with him 3.5 years ago. I think highly enough of Luc to have recommended him to Siemens in the past to be a liaison for the French speaking community of SE users in Canada (eh!).

Luc has however remained independent for whatever reason and this is his forum created because he likes Solid Edge and thinks you should too. Luc also has a back ground in actual manufacturing software such as CAM so he knows how all of these tools of ours are supposed to inter-relate to allow us to be productive in our work. I think that outside of Eng-Tips and the official Siemens BBS this site of Luc’s deserves to become within the next year one of the top forums for SE. (As a side note here Eng-Tips while valuable has some odd notions of what is proper and you can’t post things about user groups or conferences or whatever else they don’t like at that time. Eng-Tips is a commercial site and is moderated with their own special interests in mind first and foremost.) I want to encourage everyone who will to go there and register and even more importantly to contribute in some way. Active volunteers and community participants at this time are far and few between with Solid Edge. Really this is true for any CAD software as when you think of the number of subscribers compared to the number of people who participate online very few are there and I think the vast majority who show up are lurkers.

But the establishment of a network of communication which Luc’s forum will help to do has far reaching potential consequences for those who will help.

Networking between users is hard to do when the VARS and software authoring companies keep the lists of subscribers in a vault you never have access to. They generally are not going to help you find other users in your area. Networking between individuals is how you find work, get work, get hired, improve your professional career and most importantly in some ways find a local source of talent you can go to with your laptop and file when you need to be bailed out. The side benefit of enjoying the company of your peers is also well worthwhile in my opinion.

So go there and help kick start this thing with Luc. Stay there and help make it happen. Now I am going to talk to the SE users who primarily participate only on the BBS about something I think is important. For some reason SE users are some of the most insular people I have met in the software world. Pretty independent minded and self reliant they have for the most part only communicated behind the closed doors of the BBS forums and rarely venture into the world at large. Now I am going to say that some of these guys were a big help to me when I started and still are but only on the BBS and rarely do you see these uber users in the public eye or forums. I think it is time for this to change and for these talented individuals to help get this community going. I think Luc’s site is a fine place to start and it is time to do more than show up at something once a year and hide in a closed forum for the rest of it. Did I just say that? Well, really, did I mis-state the truth? I know how many of you guys are excited about the revival of the yearly conferences but I am telling you this is only part of the puzzle to be put together. The university will last four days this year. The forums however last all year and should be an integral part of serious SE users who see value in the growth of SE and the community to their future.

2 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Autodesk Sez Don’t Worry Be Happy!!

Posted on December 27, 2012 | Leave a comment

This is going to be a long post today. It covers a topic that is in direct response to people like Carl Bass at Autodesk 2012 and Teresa Payton former Whitehouse CIO who was a speaker there. In thinking about this whole cloud thing and the amount of blatant deception that accompanies it I can only say I am disgusted with how patronizing and duplicitous cloud purveyors have become towards people who are their target markets. This will quote from the Cadalyst articles on Autodesk 2012 and I respond accordingly. This will also quote from Verizon Data Breach Investigations.

http://www.verizonbusiness.com/about/events/2012dbir/

These are lengthy reports but I will quote from two of them. These individual reports for 2011 and 2012 can be found at the link above.

Two quotes of interest. 2011 pg 4 “We are often asked whether the cloud factors into many of the breaches we investigate. The answer is “No–not really” It’s more about giving up control of our assets and data (and not controlling the associated risk) than any technology specific to the cloud.”

2012 pg 33 top “Web applications abound in many larger companies and remain a popular (54% of breaches) and successful (39% of records) attack vector.”

The common thread in all these problems in the above reports is reliance on the web. Autodesk when they demand you go to the web forces you to be subject to a myriad of things forever beyond your control. They know this and will leave you on your own when problems strike. Proof of this is found by their own words as you read on. One of the more disturbing aspects of the above studies where CAD creation is concerned is that they feel that many IP thefts are not detected and so subsequently not reported. Unlike financial data where a loss is generally quickly detected because of math discrepancies IP theft may never be detected as how do you police an idea incorporated into competing products? Maybe you find out when your competitor beats you to the patent office with your design. Maybe you find out when knockoff products flood the world designed with your time and money and produced by the Chinese and their shopping carts.

http://www.cadalyst.com/collaboration/autodesk-and-cloud-part-1-customers-039absolutely039-will-have-a-choice-15251

And

http://www.cadalyst.com/cad/product-design/autodesk-and-cloud-part-2-fusion-360-will-deliver-professional-level-cad-cloud-15

These first two segments go together because it concerns Bass’s statements and Fusion 360 and deceptive promises of concern for customers security.  From part 1.

“I think there are a huge number of obstacles to every organization, you know, adopting cloud technology, and I don’t think they’re insignificant,” Bass told the media. “The … one that jumps to everyone’s mind is the question of security — privacy, liability — something around levels of service in some ways and concern about confidential information. I think some of those will fall by the wayside; I think others will be there. … Do you expect to see dramatic breaches of privacy? Yeah, we’ve already seen them. … That will continue to happen. To the extent we [store data on the cloud] or anywhere else, there will be serious things to consider. I think that is not [a concern] that goes away easily.”

Another concern I hear frequently but that Bass didn’t address is the issue of data ownership. Rumors persist that any customer data stored on the Autodesk cloud becomes the property of Autodesk; however, that isn’t the case according to the Autodesk 360 Terms of Service (rev. 9/6/2011):

2. Proprietary Rights  2.1 Your Rights. As between You and Autodesk, and subject to Section 2.2 (License by You; Disclosure), You and Your licensors have and will own all right, title, and interest in and to Your Content.

From part 2

 “When it comes to moving from desktop software solutions to cloud-based options, Discher said, companies today are most concerned with data security and how to make a successful transition to new cloud-based tools and workflows. Her advice: “Take the cloud tools that will improve the processes you have in place. Don’t reinvent processes.” Regarding security, she said, “Concerns are real and valid, so customers will have to make some moves they might not be 100% comfortable with in order to tap the tremendous benefits” of cloud-based tools.”

And

  “Contrary to what is true for some popular cloud-based solutions today, Discher told me that users of Fusion 360 maintain ownership of data the created and stored there. This is true of all Autodesk 360-based services, she added, except for some parts of PLM 360. (See Autodesk 360 Terms of Service [rev. 9/6/2011]).”

So who exactly does own your data online? Contrary to the attempts at Autodesk promising that you do there are some exceptions to this. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/11/02/1737219/us-government-you-dont-own-your-cloud-data-so-we-can-access-it-at-any-time  will take you to the Megaupload site problems where many  legitimate businesses still  to this day do not have their data back. When a site is seized it is the position of the US government that you put your data there it does not belong to you irregardless of empty promises made by those who sold you a service. Clouds work off of server farms right? Is there a single server farm in this world that is totally squeaky clean and not subject to this?  Is it impossible now to see the Chinese who are expert at IP theft declaring the same and seizing server farms to go grocery shopping? The right the US government gave themselves afterall has been established and now can be used worldwide by any country. I would also mention the Patriot Act here. This gives sweeping powers to the US government to seize or view things and never notify those who are affected. I think we have entered a period of Chicago style pervasive corruption in Washington with the Fox now guarding the Hen House. This is also happening around the world with other countries and is endemic in places like China. I can easily see a government deciding to gain advantage for whatever reason for a variety of special interest groups by selling or leaking your data to them.

This server farm based cloud thing opens up in new ways the can of worms you could suffer from legally. Is it unreasonable to consider the numerous legal problems the life blood of your company could be subject to? How about bankruptcy with the server farm and everything is tied up until it is resolved. How about an equipment provider suing a server farm for non payment or say a record company suing for piracy and now it is all locked down.  We know for sure with the piracy aspect it has happened and could happen again. You readers are smart enough to extrapolate the ways this could happen so I won’t go on.

This however brings us to the crux of the situation where Autodesk is concerned and let us go to the  Terms of Service for Fusion 360 as referenced by the link above.

 

          4.3      Service Providers; No Sensitive Personal Data. You acknowledge that Autodesk may use third-party service providers in connection with the Services, including without limitation the use of cloud computing service providers which may transmit, maintain and store Your data using third-party computers and equipment in locations around the globe.  You acknowledge that any data storage functionality associated with the Services is not intended for the storage of Social Security numbers, credit or debit card numbers, financial account numbers, driver’s license numbers, medical information, health insurance information, sensitive data about personal characteristics such as race, religion, or sexual orientation, or other personal data that may pose a risk of harm to the individual if improperly disclosed (collectively, “Sensitive Personal Data”).  You agree not to upload or otherwise submit any Sensitive Personal Data in connection with the Service and further agree that Autodesk Parties will have no responsibility or liability with respect to any such Sensitive Personal Data that is processed, transmitted, disclosed, or stored in connection with the Service.

Is the definition of sensitive just this or do these things include your invention and the data used to create it. Who is “your”. Is it unreasonable to think lawyers for Autodesk would construe this to mean “your company” to? Now also think about what they are saying here. Your data is not secure with third party vendors.

            5.      Indemnification.   You shall, at Your sole expense and to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, defend (at Autodesk’s request), and hold harmless Autodesk Parties against any and all losses, liabilities, expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) suffered or incurred by Autodesk Parties by reason of any claim, suit or proceeding (“Claim”) arising out of or in connection with: (a) Your Content or use of Your Content, including, without limitation, any assertion that Your Content or the use thereof may infringe any copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property or other rights of any individual or entity, or are a misappropriation of any individual or entity’s trade secret, or contain any libelous, defamatory, disparaging, pornographic, or obscene materials or use thereof caused death or bodily injury or damage to the real or tangible property of any third party; (b) any breach of or failure by You to comply with these Terms (including, without limitation, any Policies and Additional Agreements); or (c) use of the Service Offering by You (or anyone who accesses the Service through You pursuant to Section 1.3). If requested by Autodesk to defend a Claim, You will not agree to any settlement without the prior written consent of Autodesk, and Autodesk shall have the right to participate, at its own expense, in the defense of any Claim with counsel of its own choosing.

Does the above sound like Autodesk is confident of the security on the cloud and on server farms beyond their and your control?
 

6.2      Warranty Disclaimer.  NOTWITHSTANDING ANY WARRANTY APPLICABLE TO THE SOFTWARE IN THE LICENSE AGREEMENT, THE SERVICE OFFERING IS PROVIDED “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE.”  AUTODESK PARTIES MAKE NO, AND HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL, REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED (EITHER IN FACT OR BY OPERATION OF LAW), OR STATUTORY, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OFFERING, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ALL WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NONINFRINGEMENT, AND ALL WARRANTIES THAT MAY ARISE FROM COURSE OF DEALING, COURSE OF PERFORMANCE, OR USAGE OF TRADE. YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE OFFERING IS AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION AND RISK. AUTODESK PARTIES DO NOT WARRANT THAT ANY USE OF OR ACCESS TO THE SERVICE OFFERING WILL BE ERROR-FREE, COMPLETE, SECURE OR MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR EXPECTATIONS; THAT OPERATION OR AVAILABILITY WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED; OR THAT ERRORS OR FAILURES WILL BE CORRECTED OR REMEDIED; AND AUTODESK PARTIES HEREBY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.  AUTODESK PARTIES DO NOT WARRANT THAT THE SERVICE OFFERING WILL PERFORM IN ANY PARTICULAR MANNER AND HEREBY DISCLAIM LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE AND GROSS NEGLIGENCE.  WITHOUT LIMITATION OF THE GENERALITY OF THE FOREGOING, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR (AND AUTODESK PARTIES ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY AND WILL HAVE NO LIABILITY OF ANY KIND FOR) (i) THE DECISIONS THAT YOU MAY MAKE REGARDING THE SERVICE OFFERING, (ii) USE OF THE SERVICE OFFERING INCLUDING ANY CONTENT, DATA, INFORMATION, OR OTHER MATERIAL ACCESSED BY YOU IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE OFFERING, OR (iii) ANY EFFECTS ON YOUR BUSINESS THAT MAY RESULT FROM SUCH USE.  AUTODESK PARTIES MAKE NO WARRANTIES TO ANY THIRD PARTY.  YOU ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE OFFERING INCLUDING ANY CONTENT, DATA, INFORMATION, OR OTHER MATERIAL ACCESSED BY YOU IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE OFFERING, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO YOUR COMPUTER SYSTEM OR LOSS OF DATA. AUTODESK PARTIES DO NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT THE SERVICE OFFERING IS OR WILL BE APPROPRIATE OR AVAILABLE FOR USE IN ANY PARTICULAR JURISDICTION AND YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT AUTODESK MAY LIMIT A SERVICE OFFERING’S AVAILABILITY, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, TO ANY GEOGRAPHIC AREA,  JURISDICTION OR LANGUAGE THAT AUTODESK CHOOSES, AT ANY TIME, IN AUTODESK’S SOLE DISCRETION.  This Section 6.2 will be enforceable to the maximum extent allowed by applicable law.  No information or advice (whether written, oral or otherwise) provided by Autodesk Parties or their representatives will create any warranty or in any way affect the disclaimers of warranty or limitations of liability expressly provided in these Terms. 

Basically I read this as  yes our leader may stand behind the lectern at Autodesk world 2012 and make statements about security and reliability but we here at the legal department responsible for CYA tell you we make no service or security promises and you are on your own. So you have those pesky NDA’s with your customers as a condition of doing business with them? Don’t look to Autodesk for help when what we make you use violates these.

         6.3      Functionality Limitations.  THE SERVICE OFFERING IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR YOUR OWN JUDGMENT (INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT) OR INDEPENDENT TESTING, DESIGN, ESTIMATION OR ANALYSIS, AS APPLICABLE.  DUE TO THE LARGE VARIETY OF POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS FOR THE SERVICE OFFERING, THE SERVICE OFFERING HAS NOT BEEN TESTED IN ALL SITUATIONS UNDER WHICH IT MAY BE USED AND MAY NOT ACHIEVE THE RESULTS YOU DESIRE.  WITHOUT LIMITATION OF SECTION 3.2 (RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR CONTENT) OR 6.2 (DISCLAIMERS), AUTODESK PARTIES SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FOR ANY RESULTS OR OUTPUT OBTAINED OR OTHERWISE VIEWED THROUGH THE SERVICE OFFERING OR ANY MATERIALS DEVELOPED BY YOU IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE OFFERING. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SUPERVISION, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF THE SERVICE OFFERING. THIS RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, THE DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE USES FOR THE SERVICE OFFERING AND THE SELECTION OF THE SERVICE OFFERING AND OTHER PROGRAMS TO ACHIEVE YOUR INTENDED RESULTS. YOU ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING THE ADEQUACY OF INDEPENDENT PROCEDURES FOR TESTING THE RELIABILITY, ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF SERVICE RESULTS, OUTPUT OR MATERIALS DEVELOPED BY YOU IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE OFFERING (IF ANY), INCLUDING ALL ITEMS VIEWED OR DESIGNED USING THE SERVICE OFFERING.

We make a lot of implied promises when we talk about our pay for play strategy and our desire to try to end piracy by making you check in and work off of remote servers. However we know the infrastructure you must work off of stinks and to bad, so sad that we have just thrown a huge monkey wrench into your ability to streamline your data creation. Oh and by the way, single threaded applications still are so at our end too even though we have 10,000 server cores you can rent. And by the way, we are not responsible for all the new fees you will have to pay your ISP plus the third party server dudes for data storage. Pretty much they are telling you if you were silly enough to believe anything we say about clouds saving you cash and being more capable than what you could do for yourself you get what you deserve.

 

7.       Limitation of Liability.  TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT ALLOWED BY APPLICABLE LAW AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANY FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY, (A) IN NO EVENT WILL AUTODESK PARTIES BE LIABLE HEREUNDER FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (HOWEVER CAUSED AND REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER DERIVED FROM CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION NEGLIGENCE) OR OTHERWISE), INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF REVENUE, LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF DATA, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES OR OTHER COVER, OR ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL OR ECONOMIC LOSS OF ANY KIND, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY THEREOF, NOR WILL ANY OF THE FOREGOING PARTIES BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM A FORCE MAJEURE OR AN ACT OF A THIRD PARTY OR OF NO FAULT ON ITS BEHALF, AND (B) THE TOTAL CUMULATIVE COLLECTIVE LIABILITY OF AUTODESK PARTIES FOR ALL COSTS, LOSSES OR DAMAGES FROM ALL CLAIMS, ACTIONS OR SUITS HOWEVER CAUSED OR ARISING FROM OR IN RELATION TO YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE OFFERING SHALL NOT EXCEED THE LESSER OF ALL AMOUNTS PAID BY YOU FOR THE SERVICE OFFERING GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM IN THE TWELVE MONTHS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE CLAIM OR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100). 

Icing on the cake for all of us Autodesk corporate types. We don’t care what happens to you when/if we force you to the cloud and you run into trouble there. We appreciated your loyalty and your business but now because you have run into trouble using our stuff it is time for you to go away and shut up.

 

Last but not least we come to the culmination of Autodesk corporate babblespeak, deception and legal CYA nonsense.  http://www.cadalyst.com/cad/product-design/autodesk-and-cloud-part-2-fusion-360-will-deliver-professional-level-cad-cloud-15

 

“You have a right to be concerned about security of your intellectual property on the cloud,” she said. Data security should always be your first priority, whether it’s stored on the cloud or in your own systems. “You need a prenup with your cloud vendor,” she advised. If the company goes out of business or if you move off the platform in the future, what happens?

“I believe with the right best practices and the right conversations with your vendor, you can actually be safer in the cloud,” Payton concluded. “Pick your partners wisely. Everyone is penetrable. The key is figuring out what guidelines to follow when your digital assets are gone, and figuring out how to handle the incident and how to let your customers know.

“You cannot protect that which you do not have in your line of sight. And that is what makes you nervous about the cloud. But, in some regards, you’d be better off going to the cloud because you can hold that provider contractually liable and ensure that your data is secure.”

 

This is from a former Whitehouse CIO. Remember this person was hired by Autodesk to speak as an authority on data security so they must think she is. So now we have the whole security liability protection plan for users and the reason to go to the Autodesk cloud. You can put your data on a third party server farm and since they know you can sue them THEY will make your data secure. Unless of course you had to sign an agreement with them like you had to sign with Autodesk. Oh, and by the way Autodesk, about that prenup thing your guest speaker mentions. I think a snowball in you know where has a better chance of surviving than one of your customers getting one of these prenups from you. And while we are at it here are some other questions for you to address that apply to you as well as Dassault and no I won’t hold my breath waiting for honest answers.

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

Any of you who adopt these Autodesk cloud services under these conditions truly deserve every bad thing that may happen to you. The company that wants you to stand loyally behind them with your continued financial support does not intend reciprocity.

 

Oh, before I forget I am sure Autodesk wishes you all a happy and prosperous 2013!

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,