WorldCAD Access

What's the price of Catia, really?

As my boss back in the early days of CADalyst said, "Price is news."

Problem is that today most software vendors in our industry don't publish prices. For instance, how much does Catia cost? It has the rumoured reputation of being the most expensive CAD system on the planet.

Over on Dezignstuff, Rick McWilliams got us a price:

I got a quote on CATIA V6 from a VAR. It took them 3 weeks to do it. $34,700.00

Plus 18% maintenance per year ($6,246 in this case). He adds that it consists of many modules, and so the price ranges from $9,000 to $65,000 per seat, depending on the modules selected.

(The reason Mr McWilliams mentions "3 weeks," is because of Dassault's claim that you can order Catia V6 online and then be running it, all in 20 minutes.)

Source:
www.dezignstuff.com/blog/?p=7516#comments 

Mystery new MCAD company wants to make mysterious new MCAD software - Updated

SpaceClaim must be getting old, 'cause there's a new group of developers who want to do MCAD fresher:

We are a small group of mechanical engineers and software developers working on a fesh [sic] approach to how mechanical design is done on a computer. Our backgrounds are firmly planted in the industry, and chances are that you've used products that we helped bring to market or develop; However we are not affiliated with any existing CAD company.

 They figure that there're four areas in which current MCAD systems are lacking, and for which MysteryCAD has the solution:

Design 

How to get to the 3D model:

• Problem: Modeling parts and assembling them is modeling, not designing.
• Problem: Drafting 2D sketches and then converting to 3D models is an extra step.
• Problem: Higher-level 3D systems are expensive and hard to learn.

Their solution: Our electronic napkin is a core part of our 3D design system.

My comment: Many "start with a napkin" systems have failed in the past, probably because most designers don't start their ideas with napkins. I, for example, work it all out in my head, first.

Recordkeeping

A.k.a. PDM, product data management:

• Problem: PDM systems act like traffic cops.
• Problem: You need to carry out paperwork just to get and save files. 
• Problem: PDF for dispersed teams gets complicated.

Their solution: Rename PDM as "recordkeeping," and eliminate file copying, versioning, accidental overwrites, and have no software to install.

My comment: This sounds like the file storage is on the cloud.

Collaboration

• Problem: Mostly the same as above with Recordkeeping.

Their solution: Start collaboration with a button pick, a message, and a couple of notifications.

My comment: Just about any client I work with prefers collaboration by email, even giant book publishing houses. (Sole exception is Bricsys, who want me to use their Vondle system for depositing completed projects.)

Accessibility

Here the new MCAD vendor lists the attributes of their new software:

Their solution: So easy that "anyone who can sketch their idea on a napkin" can use their software after an hour of training. Priced at $50/ month for the professional version, and a free version for everyone else. Runs on "any" desktop computer or mobile device, independent of operating system, no installation or add-ons.

My comment: From the description, MysteryCAD definitely is a Web browser-based MCAD software package. I can't, however, see browser-based MCAD working, because it is just plain too slow.

Source:
www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22F5F75TCH4 

 {h.t. Matt Lombard}  

---

Updates

The company Web site is  www.to3dnow.com. You can give them your email address to get more information when they send it out. {h.t. Deelip Menezes} 

On Matt Lombar's DezignStuff blog, the company revealed itself. Jim Foster writes:

I’m responsible for the survey. Some of you might know me from my PDMWorks days and then as a SolidWorks/DS employee after PDMWorks was acquired.
It was not meant to be a mystery; we sent an email to many people asking them to respond to the survey. My name was in the body of the email message, but I neglected to add contact names, etc., to our site or in the body of the survey. Sorry for the confusion.
We’ll be adding more information to our website http://www.to3dnow.com in the next several weeks.

 

 

 

In the category of 'Maximized TLAs in a Single Paragraph', the winner is...

Imagine your brain juggling this many acronyms in a single paragraph:

As already announced by Mayor Boris Johnson, SCOOT (Split Cycle Offset Optimisation Technique) is playing a major role in reducing traffic delays across London, helping to improve Journey Time Reliability (JTR). TRL, in collaboration with UK traffic systems suppliers, developed the SCOOT urban traffic control system which is now co-owned by Peek Traffic Ltd, TRL and Siemens Traffic Controls Ltd.

Not enough? Second paragraph: 

The latest SCOOT MMX Service Pack 1 provides a facility to assist with improving the Journey Time Reliability (JTR) along critical routes. This was originally developed for Transport for London (TfL), where it is called JTR - GOLD (Journey Time Reliability - Games Operation Led Development), to assist them in controlling the journey along key corridors in London. Its first intended application was within the Olympic route network.

 

"The Poles like us!" Chinese CAD vendor addresses critics

Chinese CAD vendor GstarCAD this morning attacks critics of the Chinese software industry:

People may be skeptical about "made-in-China" products, but there is no denying that with its 1.3 billion China definitely has no lack of brain power. GstarCAD team employed part of this amazing brain power to create its full-featured, IntelliCAD-based software.

In its press release, the company credits a number of reasons:

• GstarCAD is active in intellectual property protection.
• Eighteen years experience in technology.
• Lost-cost software based on IntelliCAD.
• Positive feedback from exhibitions in Austria, Poland, and Italy.

 

Autodesk 2012 Suite unboxing photos

AutoCAD Release 12 was the mother of all software packages. It got a special mention by PC Magazine in 1992 for having a package size that spanned something like two feet of shelf space. (I still have my copy of the software, but it is buried at the back of one of my storage areas.)

Then the AutoCAD package began shrinking, first to CDs, then to DVDs, and finally downloads. With 2012's emphasis on suites, the download size is getting a bit large, and so the suites are available on 16GB and 32BG USB keys (aka thumbdrives). For example, Ultimate Product Suite takes up 17GB.

(Don't think you can reuse these USB keys; they are read-only and I found that Linux won't even mount them.)

Here is my photoshot of unboxing:

1. The boxes for the design suites are about 5.5" wide and 4" tall, by 1" thick. Here are the boxes for the Ultimate versions of ProductDesign Suite and Design Suite. The difference between the two: one has more software on it.

2. The colorful cardboard packaging is just a wrapper. Slide it off for the actual box.

3. Open the black box to see the USB key nestled inside.

4. Use the cardboard pulltab to remove the nestled USB key. 

5. The USB key is triangular in shape, made of plastic. The color is titanium, with a nice clear yellow accent line. There is a hole with which the system administrator can lockdown the key.

Both boxes have USB keys that look identical. This means that you cannot tell which software suite is on which USB key. 

6. Open the key by pulling hard on the cap. 

           

7. The back of the key has all kinds of logos that you normally don't see on any other USB key. This must be a very dangerous one.

8. To install the software, plug the key into a USB port on your computer. Double-click the Setup.Exe file. The Serial No. and Product Key are pasted on the back of the cardboard wrapper.

TIP: The cap is very tight. Don't make Al Dean's mistake and try to twist off the cap. That's just breaks off the connector.

Will we have to get used to "BIM Washing"?

I first heard about this story from Roopinder Tara, who tweeted about it yesterday. I waited a day to see if there would be more reactions, but I have not seen any.

The story is this:

An American cable news network, MSNBC, ran a featurette (sponsored by Boeing) about BIM being used to renovate buildings. During the report, we see computer animations of several buildings, as well as of a plant, perhaps an oil refinery.

(Update: I have confirmed that some of the "BIM" footage shown by MSNBC was created with AutoCAD Plant 3D -- and not Revit or ArchiCAD.)

Reporter Amanda Drury raves that this "revolutionary new" BIM technology is saving millions of dollars on renovation projects. She names Autodesk and then Autodesk Revit as one of the sources of this software.

Interspaced with the animations are brief interviews with architect Christopher Johnson of Architecture 365. Behind him, we see a computer screen, on which we can just barely make out Graphisoft's ArchiCAD -- the only BIM software he uses. In other clips, we see him inspecting a renovation project on-site, presumably the same as in some (not all) of the computer animations.

Now, the report is accurate in one area, that Autodesk Revit is one brand of BIM software. I wonder if Autodesk provided Navisworks-generated animation graphics to MSNBC.

Graphisoft, however, is furious, for the report implies that Johnson uses Revit. Graphisoft blogger Steven Benford reported:

Immediately after the story... aired on CNBC, Graphisoft contacted Paul Sullivan, Senior PR Manager for AEC Solutions at Autodesk, and CNBC reporter, Amanda Drury and Drury’s executive producer, Lisa Hughes.

Although both Autodesk and CNBC acknowledged the representation of Kit Johnson’s work in the story is misleading, they maintain the story itself is factually correct. As of today, CNBC has refused to issue a correction or retract the piece.

I consider the mix-up in names about as serious as a reporter mixing up Ford and GM. A big deal to some in the industry, a means-nothing to most viewers.

 More serious, however, is how Autodesk staff talked it up on Facebook and Twitter. Mr Benford includes a screen grab of Autodesk's Facebook page where the company boasts of architect Johnson using Autodesk BIM software;  and a screen grab of the AutodeskAEC Twitter account boasting of a Texas architect using BIM software from Autodesk.

Unfortunately for Autodesk, MSNBC never said which software Johnson him uses, jus that he uses BIM software.

Mr Johnson himself afterwards said:

Small firms like ours are producing incredible construction documents seamlessly with ArchiCAD. This video is clearly an example of BIM-wash.

Graphisoft does get a chuckle out of this sad-news story: "Of all the thousands of Revit users in North America, they evidently could find none that are using Autodesk building information models to build buildings better, cheaper and faster. So they highjacked one of ours."

For me, the funny part is that MSNBC and sponsor Boeing seem to think that BIM is new, when its been around 20 years (for Graphisoft) and 11 years (for Revit). Welcome to the past, folks. Have you encountered the "cell" phone yet?

Sources:
http://blog.graphisoftus.com/graphisoft/have-we-been-bim-washed (include the MSNBC clip)

http://blog.graphisoftus.com/uncategorized/graphisoft-managing-director-steve-benford-responds-to-cnbc-report-autodesk-actions

 

Their bad: tantalizing news release fails to deliver news

The headline in this morning's news release from Tekla is tantalizing:

Latest version of Tekla BIMsight application brings along the ability to handle even bigger, combined 3D building information models much faster. Software users who have a 64-bit computer will benefit greatly from this 64-bit version.

Based on the headline teaser, I eagerly scanned the body of the news release to learn how much bigger, how much faster.

Zip.

Na da.

Ei mitään*

Instead, I learned the following:

• That this is the third release of software that is "constantly being developed."
• That the director of B&C Project Delivery segment at Tekla says that the software "is being developed all the time."
• That users can determine whether this update applies to them through the software's Home page. 
• That to learn more about the downloading the update, go to ...

A missed opportunity in educating potential customers on the benefits of this otherwise-admired software.

- - -

*) Finnish for "nothing."

CAD vendors should spend their time ignoring the Social

When Dassault Systemes launched DraftSight, it made sure it had the Social.

When PTC launched Creo, it made sure it had the Social.

Other CAD vendors spend on having staff and Web resources for the Social, also.

(By "the Social" I mean the Social Web, the whole Twitter, Facebook, texting thing.) Here's the problem. The Social is mobile. Social networking relocated to the smartphone a year or so ago, because the desktop is static (locked onto the desktop, like a landline rotary telephone) and smartphones are our new notebook computers.

 CAD doesn't work on phones, so CAD vendors don't need the Social.

(In any case, for CAD vendors it's not about the Social, if you hadn't guessed yet; it's for the marketing.)

 PS: The inspiration for this post comes from Robert Scobal's Does RockMelt (a new social browser coming tomorrow) have the right startup philosophy?

Vendors talk openly about DE's ePOW

Since I first reported on Desktop Engineering's multi-thousand-dollar price tag for a CAD vendor to become their "editor's pick of the week," vendors have been submitting to WorldCAD Access their experiences through comments to this blog and emails.

Some report the service was free; others say the magazine asked them to pay as much as $3,995. Some say it just started this year; others report it has been on-going for several years. One vendor wrote me (he wished to remain anonymous):

We've gotten several of these emails [from DE]; they arrive shortly after we've made a press release about a new product. I am certain that Tony Lockwood nor anyone else at DE has ever tested any of our products before nominating them for ePOW [editor's pick of the week].

Another asked that his comments be made public. Steve Hannath of Softcover describes the his experience this way:

Softcover, the publisher of Scan2CAD, has been preparing a new release of this product for some time. In doing so, we contacted DE about possibly advertising. As a result, DE encouraged us to use ePOW (Editor's Pick of the Week) at $3,995 to reach an awesome 60,000 email addresses.

DE wrote to me saying "To date I have not had any complaints of bad results. This program is DE's best lead generation program AND it give you lot's of PR as well, plus you get a 1/4 page recap in the magazine. This program is really an integrated program when you think about it because your on the website, your in our newsletters and your in print plus your endorsed by Tony Lockwood to his ePOW audience all for $3,995."

Frankly, it's a very good deal. I was tempted. DE supplied a long list of "sponsors" who had used it. However, we chose not to use ePOW, largely because it is contrary to the standards by which we would like to see Scan2CAD judged.

What is most shocking is the long (huge) list of CAD companies who have had no hesitation in using ePOW's spurious and tendentious praise to sell their products.

This and similar practices are not uncommon in the CAD industry. There are many CAD product reviews which are paid for by the promise of advertising and written up using "facts" supplied by partisan sales and marketing VPs. Sadly, there is little or no honesty in many CAD product reviews.

I am grateful to Ralph for exposing this practice but I do not expect this to change things much. Many opinion-makers in the CAD press do not know what they are talking about. They allow themselves to manipulate or be manipulated.

I recall back at A/E/C Systems 2000 when, during the opening minutes of the show, staffers from CADalyst magazine went around the exhibit area placing "Top Ten" placards at specific booths. From www.upfrontezine.com/travel/aec2k.htm#tuesday

Within the first 15 minutes of the show opening, CADalyst magazine staffers were busy taping large banners on certain booths: "CADalyst Top Ten." Top ten what, I wondered? I asked the marketing person at one of the lucky booths -- she didn't know. "Top ten something, I guess," she replied. "Maybe we're one of the top ten software packages?"

Perhaps one of the Top Ten advertisers?

PS

Something you'll never hear from Oprah: a thank you to corporate and government sponsors for funding the "generosity" she shows her audience.

It sounded like a typically over-the-top generous gesture from Oprah Winfrey. [Billionaire] Oprah: "We are going to Australia!" Australian government touts Oprah junket, as taxpayers left to foot the bill. Oprah's Australia trip to cost country $3 million. -- National Post

 

Desktop Engineering fails to reveal pay-for-play

Desktop Engineering charges CAD vendors $3,995 (see update below) to be featured as their "DE Pick of the Week." Well, that's the list price; in these economic times, deals abound.

Whatever the amount, the CAD vendor get a press release issued by Desktop Engineering, whose staff copies'n pastes the vendor's name into a template, "...Selected Editor's Pick of the Week by Desktop Engineering," and then blasts it out by email.

They also get an enthusiastic article written by Tony Lockwood.

Neither the press releases nor articles state that the editorial endorsements are paid for by vendors, and so do not constitute the independent opinions of the magazine's editorial staff.

In the publishing business, this is known as "advertorial," where seemingly-independent editorial writing is paid for by vendors. User-oriented magazines don't run advertorials; semi-honest ones include a header stating that the editorial is paid-for advertising.

(Another industry term is "pay for play," where a vendor will not even get a hearing from the "journalist" or analyst, unless that cheque is passed across the table first. I've heard of amounts as high as $10,000. Makes my offer to vendors to purchase reprint rights for $250 seem like children's toy money.)

In addition to Desktop Engineering, another magazine that makes extensive use of vendor-written articles is the German-language AutoCAD Magazin. During my last year with CADalyst magazine (1990), the publisher ensured that advertorials made up the bulk of the December issue -- much to the disgust of us in editorial.

The problem with these magazines keeping their vendor-driven editorial secret is that it besmirches all publications, including user-oriented ones like upFront.eZine and WorldCAD Access.

At www.deskeng.com/pick-of-the-week you can view the list of vendors who ponied up the $4,900. Is this what Mr Lockwood means when he ends his articles with "Thanks, pal"?

In the end, my rant won't matter, because most readers don't care, and neither do vendor-oriented magazine publishers.

Updates

An editor from England reports:

Apparently, in the UK at least, what DE do is illegal. Very illegal indeed. I knew it was ethically wrong, I didn't know the law courts agreed.

CAD vendors are telling me that the price charged by DE varies, such as $3500 or $3995 or even free.