Tag Archives: Proe

Yes Gertrude, PLM World has a Dress Code

Posted on July 13, 2012 | 12 comments

Posted today at the Siemens SE Misc category on the BBS Forum.

“I just got an email through regarding the PLM Connection event next week in the UK. I was pretty shocked to see a dress code stipulated – see the image below!! The day a company starts to tell their CUSTOMERS how to dress shows a severe disconnect from reality. Do Siemens really think this sort of pomposity will endear them to potential clients (let alone existing ones)?

Now I know why Steve Jobs never made it to PLM World; his black crew neck just didn’t cut it with the organizers.   Roger”

As they say seeing is believing. https://bbs.industrysoftware.automation.siemens.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=5687

This is a priceless example of PLM World. When a PLM World guy showed up  at a meeting we had after SEU2012 to discuss user groups he was the only one in a suit and tie. Tony Affuso and Karsten and ALL the other UGS/SE/Siemens people I can remember seeing during the event were dressed casually with corporate polo shirts replete with SE logos. I talked with this individual after the meeting and asked him if he had noticed that none of the SE attendees wore formal clothing. He grinned and said yes he had noticed that but never had a clue why I asked. The big shots with Siemens knew their SE users which was evidently something not of importance to the PLM guy

The more I hear about PLM World the further any good opinion I may have of them in any area falls fast. I think they have turned out to be a bunch of self-interested fiefdom building individuals who have become way to fascinated with form over function and have forgotten the reason they purportedly exist is to promote the user community. That PLM guy was not there to build bridges with SE users he was there because they are not happy that SE is holding an event beyond their control and that they can’t profit from. I believe he would rather have seen 37 SE users under PLM Worlds control than to see 500 SE users at their own event out of PLM Worlds control

Devon Sowell was one of the principle SW bloggers out there until about a year ago. At that time he just dropped off the face of the SW blogosphere and no one quite knew why. Turns out that he went to a meeting with some of the SW corporate type individuals and he was sniffed at for his dress standards. Basically he was lacking the “proper” minimum level of approval clothing. So these clueless idiots take a prominent SW blogger who has done a lot towards supporting their community and selling their products and totally alienate him with their stupidity. He was already unhappy with the way the software was going and this was the final straw. Here is a link to his comment, the first response to Matt’s post. http://www.dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=7048

This post should be read by PLM World as it is a bit of reality for those who have lost touch with their “customers”

I do not understand why PLM World seems to have this death grip on UGS and the user community. They are supposedly a separate entity from UGS Siemens SE but it seems at times they are not and get away with bad behavior that would not be normally tolerated by an independent contractor.

Consider the following. I have had contact from NX RUGS who have chaired local groups who are totally fed up with PLM World and the solution from PLM World seems to be to marginalize these whiners instead of listening to unpaid volunteers real complaints. Then we have SE which was put into this groups cold clammy hands in 2006 and by 2009 attendance was down from around 500 or so SE users at their own 2005 event in Cincinnati to I believe 37 at PLM World 2009 Nashville. The very first year we have an individual event back for SE users attendance was 250 and the second was double that. Within three years it is my prediction that we will have more than PLM World will have. This is because the SE event is being held and directed by individuals that have a true interest in community and listen to what users want. You know who you are and my heartfelt thanks go out to this small group.

PLM World is part of the legacy, the bad side of the legacy, that has followed UGS into the world of Siemens. It did not have to be this way but I gotta tell you that the very first words out of the PLM World reps mouth at our meeting about lack of SE attendance was they would have to form a committee and study the problem. Really.  He actually said that and does that not exemplify how totally narcissistic and moribund that bunch of losers has become?  If you are from PLM World and you read this please excuse my use of the fictional slang word “gotta”.  I know I let you down with improper syntax and I promise to try to do better.

The best thing that I think could happen to promote the active growth of any Siemens software product user community would be for either the complete externally forced rejuvenation of the PLM World philosophy or just get rid of it and start over.

12 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

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

Surfcam Velocity 6 at the Barber Vintage Sports Museum.

Posted on June 28, 2012 | 4 comments

Went to see Surfcam V6 at the Barber Sports Museum yesterday. For those of you interested it should be available to subscribers as a download this Friday.

As an aside here it was amusing to talk to Karsten Newbury at SEU12 about CAM programs.  They were a bit shocked at how many are out there when they started seriously looking for an integration partner and how they are all different. I knew exactly what he meant and this is why it is taking me so long to pick a CAM program. I only want to do this one more time for my main CAM program and I am in no hurry to make a choice I will regret. The CAM market appears to be in a state of flux right now just as CAD is with the Kings getting ready to be knocked off because they have forgotten the idea that the customer comes first. Meaning of course Mastercam and SolidWorks who are going to find out that you can’t take customers for granted.

I do have some negative things to say about Surfcam but on the whole I was genuinely favorably impressed with the program and the new life being breathed into this recently nearly stagnant company and I thought you should read this before going on. Now on to what I saw and my impressions in this short hands off exposure to V6.

Yes undo is still not there and when I asked about it I got a sad answer, as the guy who is telling me this has his eyes rolling back in his head. The excuse proffered is there are to many legacy problems to solve to do this. Yes it appears all the actual users and support people hate this but—no change. Yes he admitted every one else does this but Surfcam. Now he did say that they have some kind of formula for determining what gets fixed and it is based upon the number of complaints. Perhaps it is time to flood them with complaints on this both in Public and in private direct with the company. I am looking at probably renewing my old seat here and no undo is a big problem for me.

So I am telling Surfcam publically that this is a big deal for this user and not smart business to say no change is coming here because we don’t feel like dealing with our legacy stuff. Maybe your customers don’t complain about this anymore because they have given up hope and this is not a good place for you as a company to be. This undo lack has been true for at least the last ten years that I know of.

There will be no feature recognition so you will still have to pick and sort hole sizes by look for size and how this will work for tapped, and not tapped and holes with treatments I don’t know. Surface selection is nothing even close to the beauty of FR I see elsewhere.  Certainly it is bad when compared with Camworks and Featurecam and HSMWorks  which are three others I have looked at recently. What is automated in other programs you will have to do yourself here but the flip side is I think perhaps better strategy for fine tuning a  particular cut path if you are into serious production runs or a really large complex mold. On the whole though I prefer to have the Feature Recognition capabilities I have seen in other programs which would represent a genuine time saving and efficiency in my shop for the parts I do.

They did not talk about Lathe at all and no one asked either. I assume this means that Surfcam continues perhaps ten years or so of basically nothing new for lathe users. As of yet I have not had a cnc lathe so this is what I have been told by others who are familliar with this part of the program. I am also assuming that users have given up on this as with 50+ people there you know darned well some lathes are in use but no one asked anything about lathe.

I like the tool paths and I have always felt that the tool library and prompts for tool path strategies were the best I had ever used. This stays pretty much the same and that is good. There are some nice looking toolpaths in there although some like the new 3-axis radial I can’t see much use for. 4 and 5 axis has always been a strength in Surfcam I have been told by others. I have not used these but what I saw in the demo appeared to back these claims up. Posts with Surfcam have been bullet proof in my experience and still look to be so.

Verify looked pretty good but what really looked good was the amount of time it took to regen tool paths on some fairly complex parts. The Surfcam I remember took forever to do this sometimes and watching the demo guy confidently redo tool paths with full confidence he could do this in a limited time frame was nice to see. 64 bit which is new to Surfcam in this version has made a difference.

One of the strange things there was when users were asked about Truemill and how many were using it. Very few hands went up and I don’t get this. SpaceClaim was also there and they showed a few very basic direct edits and I am listening to some of these guys ooh and ahh over this and wondering what rock they live under to A, have Truemill and not be interested enough to try it and B, what world are they living in that they have never seen a direct edit move done before. Kind of weird.

The broken link for Faroarms is fixed finally but will only work for USB style arms. I had kept my old seat of Surfcam just for the Faro interface and was not aware that this had been screwed up through V4 and V5. There is a serial port to usb port converter out there you can plug into though so I think this is not a problem if you own a Gold Faroarm like I do for instance. I watched the Faroarm guy collect points and make surfaces with the piss poor cad inside of Surfcam so even though cad is terrible ( Doing this with collected points on a grid and each point had to be dealt with one by one. You can however work with a surprisingly large variety of parts this way)  you can do very good things with a Faroarm and it beats the heck out of spending the $10,000.00 plus for Faro’s outrageously priced software. I will most likely be renewing my old seat of 2.5 axis solely for this if nothing else.

What may be more important is just like SolidEdge has done in the past few years with a change in management philosophy Surfcam too may now have a couple of individuals outside the Deihl family who are wholeheartedly committed to making the right changes and are working on doing so. They are hiring more developers and intend to work on stuff. Which stuff was not defined to me however.

Basically I left feeling that for the first time in years Surfcam was becoming worthy of another evaluation. I don’t like some of the lacks mentioned above but they have gotten my attention.

4 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

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

ZW3D 2012 Nearly History, Viva Solid Edge

Posted on May 28, 2012 | 6 comments

Before I get into the primary aspect of this post a few comments. I have regarded the Synchronous Tech in Solid Edge as revolutionary and was a fan of it from the first time I saw it in action with one of my imported parts from VX. It was like a light went on and I could see power I wanted and the potential there and immediately became a customer for Solid Edge.

It was not until ST3 that SE matured into what I had envisioned. I can only say that every day I use it I am reminded of justifications for the validity of my choice for the work flow in my company. ST5 is right around the corner and I expect to have a number of great things to talk about and power being put into users hands. I am excited to be here.

Over at http://ontheedge.dezignstuff.com/ there are a number of discussions going on regarding SE and SW and the differences in both programs and in some ways the philosophy of the respective parents of both. On one hand we have a company with a plan for the future and a robust geometry kernal designed in part for best in class direct editing. On the other we have a chaotic corporate program mashup based it seems on a mythical user base per Bernards imagination.  Serious problems abound as they try to pick some sort of viable corporate direction. Dassault knows they have lost the direct editing battle because they aren’t being sold the technology that makes ST possible.  So off to the races they go with their own kernal that evidently is not so hot while they try to do it to.

You Solid Works users are in for really rough times for years to come. In conjunction with the switch to the new geometry kernal you will have the joy of translation problems. Direct editing will take years to sort out assuming it can even be made to work as well on their kernal as ST does on parasolids. Add in new program issues to as they move from SW to the Catia Lite GUI.  Or you can elect to stay with poorly supported SW traditional with few improvements that you will still have to pay for until they just cancel it.

If I may be so bold here I think I have a term Dassault could use for the combination of cloud, new kernal problems and some sort of direct editing in combination with exciting socially immersive  3D engineering experiences  and crowd sourcing goodness. They could call it Le Stink!R0nerous Technique 😉

On to ZW3D.

Over time you grow to trust things that have worked. Tapping is one that falls into that category for me. So I am cutting my very first parts on my new mill. I no longer have my old faithfull VX V14.5 loaded and instead I am using ZW3D 2012. It is a good thing to regen your cam plan in these cases as there may well be differences and the plan in any case needs to be in the version you are using. This had always worked before with S&F in the tool library so I regen and post without thinking I would have to check the auto entered data ahead of time. First two holes sounded labored and on the third the tap shattered. I am thinking here what the heck, first part new mill NOW WHAT! So for your entertainment today I present the new tap library input for S&F for a 1/4 18 NPT. The tool library has always been skimpy here but the data associated with it was correct. User beware, you will have to double check everything and trust nothing with cam and tapping now. The recommended 7/16 drill bit is to small by the way so be carefull on drill sizes to, they can be incorrect.

On a seperate note here. I go to post this on the ZW3D forums today and the following observations on this. Categories. Discuss,share and ask?? How stupid is this and what was wrong with the four categories that worked for so many years on the old forums with goofy titles like Cad and Cam? New and improved? How about new stupid and unworkable with no sorting. You go to upload pictures and you have to guess that the blue patches with no label are relevant. Then when you figure that out you have to figure out where to go on the tabs to paste the pic to the post and no hints to let you know what is going on. WHEN are you guys going to start fixing these things you have been so busy improving? Not at all pleased to see that evidently the forum coders are now doing the tool library too.

This is going to be my next to last post for ZW3D. I am confident that within a couple of months I will have a new CAM program one way or another. My hopes are for integrated something with SE. If this does not happen soon I will sadly move on to selecting the best stand alone CAM program that will suit my needs. But in any case what will be next regarding ZW from this soon to be ex-users viewpoint will be a post mortem commentary.

I really do understand the reluctance of Solid Works users to let go. You get time and money and experience in a product and you hate to let it go. Here I am still fiddling around with ZW3D when deep down inside I know better. Changing is a major inconvenience in time both in legacy files and in learning new things and money you have to now spend and have spent. Trashing this part on my brand new mill was it for me. OK SW users, your time is coming to and what will it be for you?

6 Comments

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

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

So, WHO owns this stuff you put on the Cloud?

Posted on April 26, 2012 | Leave a comment

COFES as a group seems to be defending the cloud as a robust solution. Evidently many of the attendees and associated companies produce something that will depend upon the clouds usage to create income for their companies.

Dassault and Autodesk are telling us that they will be forcing their customers to the cloud. Yes I know that you hear two stories about what will happen with customers especially with Dassault’s SW but I think Jeff Ray was the most honest of all the Dassault officers when he made his famous when it hurts enough all users will migrate to the cloud statement.  There is no ambivalence by these companies and they want to forcibly squeeze you of every dollar they can by legal methods. Prove me wrong cloudies.

I think that forced income from pay for play is the primary motivation here without regard for customers. Perhaps contempt for the idea that these products should be of greater benefit to their prospective customers over what they have now would be another descriptive thing that could be said RE the cloud offerings.

Today we have more bad indicators of just how rotten the cloud will be for CAD.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/your-data-your-rights-how-fair-are-online-storage-services/4877

I think Google is the poster child for manipulating your stuff to their benefit without compensating you for the use of your stuff. If you will note in this article the various companies and their positions on data ownership there are some rather chilling claims laid to your stuff by some of these. Remarkably they are at least talking about EULAs whereas the cloud embracing CAD companies have yet to spell anything out other than vague grand sounding promises and threats.

Dropbox is the online cloud storage program most of the people I know use and it appears to be the most benevolent at this time but will still be using things like the Amazon servers.

Amazon, the server that most of the cloudies talk about using has this statement in the EULA.     “We may disclose Your Content to provide the Service Offerings to you or any End Users or to comply with any request of a governmental or regulatory body (including subpoenas or court orders)”.

Think about the ramifications here for just a moment if your company or products data is stored on the cloud. Where by law it can be accessed by those with connections. Governments like China will be able to demand access to your stuff under some legal umbrella and even if you are not charged with anything the fishing expedition will have divulged all your IP.

Look at all the fraud going on around the Whitehouse with Democrat bundlers getting all kinds of access to Executive branch favors with a possibly corrupt influence peddeling attorney General enabling and protecting them. The head of GE for instance meets with Obama on a pretty regular basis and I am sure he would never use his influence over croissants would he. So now you have your competitor donate $100,000.00 to the DNC and he gets access to your stuff through a court order. OK, tell me this is paranoia if you wish cloud guys but here it all is in black and white and legally binding.  Once your data is gone it is gone. Unlike problems with your bank you can never be made whole or reimbursed for your damages. The Patriot Act means this can happen and you won’t even have the privilege of notification or appeal before it is a done deal.

Back in December I wrote this.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/london/defense-giant-ditches-microsofts-cloud-citing-patriot-act-fears/1349?tag=mantle_skin;content

Next up is this heart warming story of BAE, a trivial and inconsequential itty-bitty defense contractor. It seems that yes, security does matter. And here we see a perfect example of why anything that uses the cloud is not secure period. There are just so many provable roadblocks between the promise and the reality and so much of it totally beyond the control of any software author from the infrastructure they do not own to governments they can’t control who don’t give a flip about your security.”

OK cloud purveyors. It is time to start telling us exactly what you intend to cover or not cover. What really are the risks and benefits and what are your ironclad guarantees of buyer indemnification.

My prediction is that there will not be one single detailed response because these cloud companies know all about these problems and don’t care. They just want you locked in to pay for play. This myopic business model is quite staggering in its lack of forward vision and I wonder if these cloudies can see past immediate cash in their pockets to the future. It will be hard to get subscription cash from companies who have gone bankrupt due to loss of IP.  It will be even harder to get cash from those wise individuals that will not be sticking around to be fleeced.

What a deal. Not secure, not reliable and not cost effective. Pssst, hey guys, I got some stock in the Brooklyn Bridge I can let you have cheap!

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , ,

CAD and planning for Stability and Reliability

Posted on April 18, 2012 | Leave a comment

Watching all the PR stuff with COFES 2012 this week and reflecting on choices. I see the benefit of the cloud in small ways for CAD in things like taking perhaps an IPad like device to a job site and looking at details for a job. Maybe even simple work there but nothing complicated for sure. And the work done there would still be archived and organized back at the place of business.

Looking at the failure of the cloud in a spectacular way at COFES where they surely ought to have been able to deliver reliability if it was humanly possible. Evidently at this point in time it is not. It brings me to thinking about the CAD world and how we make choices for what we use and the ramifications of those choices.

I have been watching with great interest the Dassault debacle over their cloud implementation attempts. Tons of resources poured into stuff customers don’t want any part of. As clarification here I have no idea how this is all being received by Catia users as I am primarily interested in midrange MCAD. I can guess though by seeing Siemens picking up more customers than Dassault is. Insofar as the SW users go there is huge anger over all this mess. Nothing is for sure from the kernal to the way software will or won’t have to operate on the cloud. Dassault regularly sends out conflicting statements of future intent. I think in part this is because they are deciding if they want to even be in a truly cadcentric market or do they think they can make more money with social media driven “experiences”.  In the mean time whole careers built on cad design and geometry creation are in jeopardy as users are faced with cloudy places they don’t want to go to, bugs that are not fixed and emphasis seemingly on everything but robust geometry creation. You don’t think lots of SW users feel this way look at maintenance renewal rates  and comments from people on the web that were huge fans a few years ago who today are not.

Dassault also has another huge problem in that Synchronous Tech which is based on the parasolid kernal is owned by Siemens. There are things in there that make ST the best all around direct modeller out there that are not for sale to competitors. Now DSS is faced with SW having to work on a kernal with features missing or push to their own kernal. All the talk made about not to worry about the parasolid kernal and SW is I believe just a smoke screen. They are already way behind on implementing direct editing and if they don’t do something they are going to get their rears thoroughly kicked. So their choice is to change kernals for the “new” SW Catia Lite and give all the buyers the thrill of having to learn a new program GUI plus failed translations for years to come along with being beta guinea pigs for direct edit developement. Or you can stay with SW traditional and pay fees each year for meager cosmetic improvements until they end it entirely.

Autodesk is now telling everyone they will have to go to the cloud if they intend to use Autodesk products. I am not seeing in statements lately any ambiguity here and so while they are not giving lots of details I suspect it is all about pay for play and the end of things like permanent seats of software. This also means by the way the end of true data ownership by authors because if there are no permanent seats there is no permanent use of their own intellectual property either. Ya gotta pay to play forever no matter how egregious the conditions Autodesk creates for you are in this wonderful new world. I think I can make these types of statements with a high degree of certainty by the way as none of the cad on the cloud companies have lifted a finger to dispel numerous real concerns.

Don’t know a whole lot about ProE or Creo as they are just there and have a fairly large user base and not a whole lot going on. I guess here but perhaps it is a legacy user base that feels more comfortable with what they know over what may work best. Creo does seem to be a company looking for a place to be and a marketable identity.

So this leaves Siemens as the last of the big four software companies. When I bought into Solid Edge it was for the power I saw in direct editing. What it has become in the three plus years since then is a whole lot more.  I see consistent planing with a goal in best in class geometry creation. There are things coming up in the near future that even the most diehard surface modeller from SW will have no complaints about ending this last perceived lack of ability. SE is already the best all around implementation of direct editing out there. It is the best midrange MCAD modeller right now for mechanical parts which is the vast majority of all MCAD. The only thing lacking outside of the soon to be fixed surfacing is the integration of  other products. This too though has become a priority and will be fixed in the near future.

Oh, and can I say that there has been no mention of forced use of clouds here?

While many are faced with huge and disruptive changes I can say that this is not the case here with SE and I assume NX although I don’t use NX or keep up to date on it. No kernal change forthcoming. Mature direct editing. An emphasis on geometry where developement funds are used to my benefit and not to create pay for play cloud crap or “Minimoys”. Everything I see and hear is strictly business and that business is geometry creation. Bass at Autodesk/Inventor is telling you what you are going to get like it or not. Bernard of SW/Dassault capers across the stage with his IPad and tells you that you are going to like “immersive experiences” just because he says so. ProE/Creo ???? don’t have a clue. SE on the other hand is all about what you want and need to do your job in the most effective way possible.

I made a choice to move to SE from VX/ZW3D for CAD because it was a logical decision based on what benefited me in part creation and especially in ease of working with imported geometry and existing part changes. What it has become since then regarding the trashing of users by Dassault and Autodesk and the go nowhere philosophy at Creo is a whole lot more. It has become a stable future with a company that has a plan that includes my desires and needs with a product that is tremendously useful and quickly improving.

There are a lot of you CAD users out there who are faced with bad things and you have some choices to make that will affect the rest of you and or your company’s future. If stability, capabilities and reliability of the software you use combined with a corporate management philosophy that includes user needs and input along with a clear and concise roadmap for the future is important to you, I think you should have a look at SE. I have been well served and you will be to.

Let me add something here. I don’t get freebies or software or anything from Se that any other user does not get. I pay my way entirely out of my own pocket in every area. This blog happened primarily because most of the time I truly enjoy working with SE. Yeah thats right nothing is perfect. And I believe there should be a greater user community out there for SE so I am willing to spend some time helping it along. I recommend and support SE because it has proven itself to me to be tremendously beneficial to what I do for a living.

Leave a comment

Posted in machinedaudiohornlens.com

Tagged , , , , , , ,