Tag Archives: Inventor

Intel Rejects Cloud for Design and Manufacturing Data

Posted on April 18, 2013 | 17 comments

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.

17 Comments

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 , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

So, Why Isnt Solid Edge Marketed Effectively?

Posted on January 11, 2013 | 5 comments

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.

5 Comments

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CAM for Solid Edge Moves Forward

Posted on December 20, 2012 | 4 comments

As I sit here using a CAM program I have grown to despise this journey to CAM integrated with Solid Edge has been an endless journey. Geometric is working with Siemens to develop this with a partnership that was started I assume just prior to SEU2012 last June in Nashville. Bruce Wiener with Geometric was there with a cobbled together idea of what could be. Of course getting to a full blown product that has been tested and all the little “i’s” dotted and “t’s” crossed is not a simple thing so we have to wait.

Siemens is releasing a new product called “3DSync” http://secure.campaigner.com/Campaigner/Public/t.show?YaOe–H3Zq-1Sazih2 will take you to a page that will allow you to read up on it and download a free trial which is good until May 15th 2013. As a word of warning here if you have a seat of Solid Edge on your PC you can’t run this unless you set up a virtual machine through something like VMware and according to support this is not recommended.

I find the expiration of the trial interesting for a particular reason.
The principle drawback for many CAD users where Solid Edge has been concerned was not the basic capabilities of the program but the lack of an ecosphere of integrated apps. Just after the release of ST4 for the first time this became a priority for SE when a position was created solely for the purpose of creating this ecosphere. Since manufacturing is the only reason for CAD to exist it makes sense that the first long overdue major integration with SE will be CAM.

This takes me to why I find the timing of 3DSync so interesting. Now keep in mind I am just connecting dots here and I am not speaking as though I have certain knowledge but I bet I am right. For the users of HSMWorks and Camworks there is a reduced function version of Solid Works that allows you to directly use SW files in an associative fashion and to do things like feature recognition and auto-updates of geometry changes. And it allows you to do so without having to spring for a full blown seat of SW. When I was checking into HSMWorks and Camworks for example the reduced capability solids SW program was $1,000.00. I believe this is the reason for 3DSync and all this is leading up to the ST6 release this June in Cincinnati at the SEU2013. By the way, if you are a Solid Edge user or just interested in seeing what Solid Edge and the user community is all about it would benefit you to be there.

I see indications in the questions being asked of users by Dan Staples and Karsten Newbury on the Solid Edge BBS forums that there are a number of things to be included in ST6 that will make it the most powerful release of any of the ST series and I would include even the first one. By the way, for those of you accustomed to the idea that the leadership of a company never spends time interacting with users because that is how your CAD authoring company treats you. That is not the way it is with Solid Edge and the leadership here actively interacts in meaningful ways with users that helps to drive what is in the final product.

The reason I say ST6 will be the most powerful release is because while ST1 saw the advent of a new way of modeling ST6 will be a mature product that will among other things include powerful surfacing for all of you that hold this single thing out as the reason SW is better. ST6 will also see the rollout of actual products integrated with Solid Edge to the point where for the first time you will be able to completely design and manufacture products without ever having to leave the GUI you are familiar with in Solid Edge.

I waited impatiently for this point in time for Solid Edge and the more I find out and the more I see reading between the lines this will be a very beneficial year for SE users.
Look folks, Autodesk is going cloud stupid, Dassault is going berserk with experience insanity + cloud stuff they have yet to make work + the joy of kernel change. Bass and Bernard are telling you what you will get like it or not and if you don’t agree you are, well you are just backwards looking and un-enlightened and need to be educated as to what you should like. Siemens, SE, Karsten Newbury and Dan Staples are on the other hand looking to put useful geometry creation and manufacturing into your shop without the cloud nonsense and top down edicts.

I can honestly say I am glad to be here and that says a lot in this day and time.

4 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

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

Dassault and now Autodesk “Experience” Software on the Cloud

Posted on November 20, 2012 | 9 comments

http://www.3dcadtips.com/understanding-dassault-systemes-3dexperience/ Author Evan Yares. If you don’t read Evans posts you might consider taking a look and I certainly recommend them. Quoted below from his post.

“Taken from the Dassault Systemes website:

Dassault Systèmes has entered a new phase in the evolution of how we bring value to our customers – moving beyond PLM to deliver holistic, 3DEXPERIENCE to imagine sustainable innovations capable of harmonizing products, nature and life. Combining social innovation capabilities, realistic 3D Virtual experiences and intelligent search-based technologies, Dassault Systèmes is pioneering a new technological wave: a 3DEXPERIENCE platform to serve the social enterprise.”

Pardon me if I am a little dense here but what the heck did CHARLES just say?  Haight Ashbury had its heyday in the 60’s and someone needs to tell CHARLES this was not a stellar business model.

Autodesk has now entered the cloud holistic software “EXPERIENCE” thing along with DASSAULT. These companies share the same problems they can’t control and both offer up vague promises never spelled out in binding written contracts. Neither of these companies can guarantee a single thing except billing statements and additional layers of newfound problems for buyers over infrastructure they neither own or control. Oh, and you can bet this will end up costing you more in many ways over time as an additional special incentive to go there. Drink the Koolaid before you go and bring your checkbook.

http://labs.blogs.com/its_alive_in_the_lab/2012/11/what-is-the-deal-with-autodesk-and-cloudmobilesocial.html

Scott Sheppard writes replete with all the required corporate speak buzzwords and phraseology. At least here we are spared the all caps thing DASSAULT loves so much.

  “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:

( I can provide a translation here for those of you wondering what he said. They had planning sessions on how to implement a paradigm that would take away autonomous permanent seats of software and replace it with data captivity and pay to play and make you think you were really getting something really cool and beneficial. Intent means you backwards looking Neanderthal type customers who want to control costs and security.)

1.Generations – Although a generation gap used to reflect a 20-year biological span, in terms of technology, it only takes a 7-year age difference to see a marked delta in how one generation uses technology versus another.”

  (OK so what does this mean in practical terms? We are supposed to cater to a group that thinks it has a right to spend half the day online with “social” media and then pay them to do so rather than doing what they were hired to do. You think I may be exaggerating here but talk to Human Resources and see if they don’t figure that to hire many young people you are expected by them to allow access to frivolous time wasters on-line.)

“2.A Shift To The East – Emerging markets in Asia and Africa are where manufacturing, construction, and media activities are moving.”

(OK, I don’t live there and I don’t plan to move there. You want me as a customer sell me what I want not what someone else half  the way around the world hypothetically wants. This is just as dumb as Al Gore saying the Europeans spend $8.00 per gallon of gas so why shouldn’t we do the same.)

“3.The Age of Access – Society is moving from only requiring access to products instead of owning them.”

  (The people I know want to own not rent. They want to be free of the dictatorial controls and uncontrollable costs renting brings. More corporate speak PR BS with no empirical evidence offered to justify it. Now maybe we are heading into such perilous economic times that renting is all some people will be able to afford but I bet almost everyone in that boat would rather be an owner.)

“7. Infinite Computing – The economics of computing are such that latency in the design process can be dramatically reduced by using banks of computers in the cloud.”

  (Sigh, where do I even begin with this? Let’s try this.  OK Scott let me help you guys out here. This uses the internet right? Do you guys own and control the internet from the server farm to my phone line access point? Please explain to me this infinite stuff and how it will be infinite over what you don’t own or control? The economics of computing in the real world dictates a workstation or server combining CPU and GPU capabilities operating autonomously off of the problem infested internet. Staggering capabilities are now available for under $6000.00 with no dependencies on any external internet choke points or security or data ownership problems. And as an added bonus I get to use the versions I want to use and not what someone like Autodesk decides I get to use.)

At the end of the day what I buy is a tool and not an EXPERIENCE. At the end of each year assessing what the cost and money earned with each owned major tool has been. I bought a Haas VF4 to cut parts quickly and efficiently and not to provide an audio-visual mechanical EXPERIENCE in my shop. I buy software to yield results not to cater to some nebulous corporate concept of EXPERIENCE. Whatever that happens to be on any given day dependent upon the latest iteration of trial balloon wisdom floating up from the corporate mountain top oracles.

I have a novel approach you cloud guys might want to consider. You  want to sell something try doing so on provable merits. Along with written guarantees and clear definitions of who owns what, how it will work reliably and securely and better than what I can do for myself and not the lies and deceptions currently offered.

 

 

 

9 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

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