WorldCAD Access

What Kind of a Threat Does Autodesk Faces from China? (part 2)

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

In the wake of the GstarCAD8 launch last month in Beijing, to which three of us western journalists were invited, I reflect on the chances of success of a Chinese CAD company in the US and world market.

GstarCAD8 was launched with sufficient fanfare. There were pretty girls, bright lights, a big stage. As more CAD companies are choosing to soft-launch major releases from behind WebEx screens, this did make us sit up and take notice. One might read a lot into their willingness to fly three Western industry journalists half way across the world to see the unveiling.

We listened through translator headphones as company executives extolled the product’s technical prowess, as well as to their deliberate, longterm campaign that over the years sought to establish Gstarsoft first as a regional CAD product, then as an international tool of choice. 

Can they do it? We are only too well aware to what China has done to us with manufacturing. Can they do it with software?

Guess what: Your software is probably already made in China – and India. I cannot think of a major CAD vendor that does not have a development team in China or India [or Russia] – or use Chinese or Indian labor on its home soil. A CAE vendor once told me that almost all of its developers were in two distinct groups, one from China, one from India. That was 20 years ago. The world has only got flatter since. 

Still, to hear one Chinese company extolling their CAD product is not enough to convince me that it will rule the CAD world. GstarCAD has only about 400 employees [Autodek has 7,500]. It is funded privately, and not by the vast concerted might of the country itself. Autodesk and other CAD companies can exhale.

There are signs, however, of a national directive for China to establish itself as a major player among software vendors. At the GstarCAD8 launch, president of GstarCAD Ky Xiang told us, "China will be the software center of the world."

Clearly, China is no longer content to be bridesmaid, earning pennies for factory, sweatshop, and cubicle labor while it sees US stockholders pocket the big bucks. This has to hurt. God help our current CAD market leaders should China ever get its act together. Even current heavyweight Autodesk would be knocked clear out of the ring if that happens.

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.]

What Kind of a Threat Does Autodesk Faces from China? (part 1)

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

Autodesk, the heavyweight champion of the world, is about to take on a contender. This one’s from China. Gstarsoft invited me to their 3rd annual conference in Beijing where, with great fanfare, introduced their contender GstarCAD 8.

Being virtually unknown outside of China (80% of its sales) did not deter GstarCAD from laying out its plans for world domination, a confidence inspired by the success of Chinese manufacturers and a hope that this will somehow translate to the software. GstarCAD resellers were on hand to point to the inevitability of the business software market caving in to the just-as-good-for-a-lot-less philosophy China is adept at capitalizing on. Why would anyone in their right mind spend $4,000 for AutoCAD, when they can do everything with GstarCAD --for only hundreds of dollars?

It is a familiar refrain for CAD insiders. We’ve heard contenders, foreign and domestic, proclaiming that they will be the ones to knock out Autodesk out of the ring. Remember DataCAD, TurboCAD, VersaCAD, Ashlar Vellum...? IntelliCAD and all the AutoCAD clones it spawned? Even Draftsight, which is propped up by CAD heavyweight Dassault, is unlikely to do much damage. But none seemed to even have slowed Autodesk. Autodesk gets bigger and stronger every year. With annual revenue of billions, profits of hundreds of millions and a seeming endless number of 2D users only too willing to convert to its vertical applications, Autodesk is indeed in an enviable position. Bentley, a long way back in the #2 spot with MicroStation, has about a quarter of Autodesk’s revenue.

One might dismiss previous contenders as lightweights, but can you ignore China? China’s will and weight of numbers is sufficient to frighten established market leaders – in any market. The list of big American manufacturing industries that have suffered from Chinese competition is long. Can China’s success in manufacturing be duplicated with software? To aspiring Chinese contenders, Autodesk’s success represent a huge target, no different than a Chinese factory undercutting a domestic manufacturer of doorknobs, underwear, cameras, dog food, computers...and almost anything else you can think of. China has proven it can rule in making all sorts of physical and consumer goods. Almost the same, for a lot less. It works. We’ve all bought into it.

But here is CAD software selling for thousands of dollars. It makes no sense to the Chinese. It’s vexing that it has continued so long. Artificially priced, as opposed to value priced, like diamonds. Ready to cave in, they’re sure, like all the other industries.

It’s only going to take perseverance, some sustained pressure and patience.

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.]

Tristram Carfrae is an engineer with an eye for aesthetics

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

Civil engineering firms work on the grandest scale. pushing back the sea, building dams, bridges, highways. Tristram Carfrae, structural engineer, director and Arup Fellow and keynote at Smart Geometry 2013, is used to overcoming the vast forces of nature. Carfrae and his firm, Arup, have built many big projects, including tall buildings, bridges, the Birds Nest Stadium and the Water Cube for the Beijing 2008 Olympic and plenty more. He is accustomed to moving heaven and earth. But when came up against a frog, he had to back down.

The diminutive green and golden bell frog (litoria aure) was endangered, and lived where Arup was digging for bridge.


The Kurilpa Bridge in Brisbane, Australia. (picture courtesy of Arup)


The distinguished and accomplished Carfrae admits to being "out of phase" here at Smartgeometry, where a decidely more youthful crowd forms clusters to build structures which can resemble modern art and playful experiments without immediate practical application. But Carfrae’s use of digital tools are lesson to all, especially in simulation. He is able to combine aesthetics with the practical… and deliver results.

One of his creations is in Brisbane, Australia, a cable-stayed bridge like no other, is as likely to invite criticism as it is praise. “I love that it has a polarizing effect,” says says Carfrae. What might appear as a random jumble of rods actually is. A spreadsheet produced random numbers which determined the length of each supporting rod. All in one shot. "We liked it, and left it alone.”


The Helix Bridge, Singapore (image courtesy of Arup)

But Carfrae really let the computers hammer away during the digital simulation of a high rise office building that employed twisted columns. It took millions of iterations to get the columns to twist yet still be able to sustain wind and structural loads. The tower was grown one floor at a time, each time satisfying structural criteria, until all floors were created. After 20 towers were declared okay by the computer, the final design selection was based on aesthetics – by humans.

But it was another aquatic creature that almost stymied Carfrae once again. This time, fish. He was pitching a bridge in Singapore. The design was inspired by a Malaysian fish net. A local touch sure to be appreciated, right?

“Mr. Carefrae, what makes you think Singaporeans would like to get to get caught in your net?,” he was asked. He was also getting vibes that Singaporeans and Malays were not exactly friends. It seems that Singapore, a city state of 5 million, maybe be the most modern of Asian cities, was cautious of its more backward neighbors. in fact, the bridge was over a body of fresh water source, meant to reduce Singapore reliance on Malaysia.

Changing gears, Arup looked into a spiral construction, but a spiral is not structural, something easily observable with a Slinky, which droops easily when its ends are pulled apart. But combine that with an opposing Slinky and connect them? Simulation validated the design. But the maintenance cost would go way up, unless the bridge was built with stainless steel.

“What would that add to the project?," the customer wanted to know.

“$15 million.”

The Singaporeans didn’t blink. They were already in love with the design. The double helix would link Singapore forever to biotechnology, a business they were chasing, and one with a ridiculously high economic potential. Singapore was already in love with the design. The double helix would link Singapore forever to biotechnology, a business they were chasing, and one with a ridiculously high economic potential.

Arup got the job, now worth $45 million.

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.] 

 

Dassault keeps beloved SolidWorks intact, so far

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

If you had been freaking out about what Dassault might be doing to your beloved SolidWorks, you would probably be reassured here at SolidWorks World 2013.

The Vision From Solidworks World 2012

At last year's event, SolidWorks newly appointed vp of R&D Gian Paulo Bassi stated that SolidWorks future lay in two versions, each relying on different kernels: one would be the tried-and-true Parasolid, upon which SolidWorks has been based since its inception. The other would be CATIA's CGM kernel. 

Though meant to be reassuring at the time and an answer to FUD* campaigns from competitors, all indications pointed to CGM being the kernel of choice for the future. After all, CGM was owned by the Dassault "family," whereas Parasolid was owned by a competitor.

But with the new CGM engine would come data incompatibility with models developed by Parasolid, and who knows what else? Can you rip out the engine from a Mustang and replace it with one from a Camaro? This led to uncertainty among users, and Bassi's statement may have even shaken their faith.

The Word from Solidworks World 2013

Though the show has already wrapped up its first day, there has been little mention of SolidWorks V6, as the CGM version of SolidWorks is known. In fact, there has been little mention of anything by Gian Paulo. After being very much the highly visible champion of SolidWorks V6, he did not even take the stage -- not the main stage nor gone up front with the other executives during the media Q&A.

Could it be that plans for SolidWorks V6 have been shelved?

At the risk of reading too much from the tea leaves, consider that V6 technology has been rolled out only into Mechanical Conceptual shown during the first morning on the main stage. It is underwhelming in its ability: a front-end to SolidWorks, rather than a robust stand-alone modeler; far from finished,  not released 'til Fall. It seems to be -- at least so far -- SolidWorks' big announcement. 

But sometimes, what is not said is just as important as what is not said. No shakeup. None of the "it's good for you, now open wide" stance. A gentle roll out. Mechanical Conceptual is a tool; use it alongside your beloved SolidWorks, not instead of it. 

Maybe what we are seeing now, is a kinder, gentler Dassault. Or maybe one that listens.

__________
*Fear, uncertainty, doubt

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.] 

My.SolidWorks.com is the new customer portal

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

SolidWorks announced its customer portal, my.SolidWorks.com, as it kicks off its annual user meeting.

Currently in beta, and open to all (go to my.solidworks.com), it is mostly an aggregation of content previously found on SolidWorks websites, or published by select SolidWorks VARs, like FISHER/UNITECH, which is often supplies good tutorials for SolidWorks users. In addition, it has case histories, even a tweet or two. Some items are several months old so you may have seem them already. I see the most prolific SolidWorks employees (Marie Planchard, Greg Jankowski, Matt West) are well represented.

According to SolidWorks, content is just a start, as the plan is to provide a common interface to a host of offerings: articles, customer service, support... and probably targeted sales messages.

Clearly, a site like this would be most useful if could be customized per the interest of the individual user, such as what Amazon does by rearranging its "storefront" each time I enter, suggesting things I might like to buy. Knowing a user is in the automotive industry should place automotive content front and center, and not bother the user with case histories from electronic companies, or medical products, for example.

My.SolidWorks is also meant to be be customized, as are most "My" sites, though I'll have to take their word for it. I tried to log in, but could not, as it recognized me as previous user. An account long forgotten, I'm sure, but trying to regenerate a new password was also unsuccessful. Oh, that's beta sites for you! I'll try again, soon. 

Anyway, could you not find all this content already on the www.solidworks.com site, I ask? SolidWorks says the search is much better. My.SolidWorks.com is built on Exalead, the French search engine purchased years ago by Dassault. Virtually unknown in the US, the acquisition had most CAD insiders scratching their heads as to what the CAD company was up to. Apparently, it has found some use among at least one of its divisions. My.SolidWorks.com also used the NetVibes technology, another head scratcher.

 [Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.] 

 

Bentley inspired to go mobile

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

There were 84 of us media types that assembled in the historic Grand Hotel Karsnapolksy in central Amsterdam, where amidst the picturesque canals, "coffee" shops, and a surprising proliferation of Argentinean steak houses, we heard all about how well Bentley is doing.

The event started with a Media Day. We were showered with product news (over 20 press briefs and releases), news of the acquisition of two companies, financial status (record revenue of $523M), and forward thinking strategy with lots of attention to mobile devices.

(The rest of the event was devoted to finalists in the Be Inspired contest, culminating in a formal dinner and announcement of the winners. This event is invitation only, for press but mostly for elite customers whose work would be judged exemplary, or would in some way inspire. The more democratic Be Together conference is for all users, closer to Bentley's headquarters, and in Philadelphia this May.)

Only after I dug myself out from under the news was I able to pay attention. I heard a lot about Bentley going mobile, both in terms of mobile devices and data mobility. Presenters were not only showing the mandatory iPad, but also Android devices -- and the brand new Microsoft Surface.

I was curious. I understand that Bentley must support Microsoft and whatever it might come up with -- even the hateful ribbon interface, and now the Surface -- but the Bentley employee demoing the Surface seemed none too thrilled. We agreed the keypad was a bit awkward. He had no difficulty in learning how to use its screen and mostly ignored the keypad which came with the device. He had adjusted to typing on the iPad, but now he was having trouble learning to do the same with Surface.

Bentley even a hired Wired editor to regale us about mobile and Internet at all levels and places in the world -- from its role at the Olympics, where unforeseen heavy use shut down the network, and to the social unrest in Kenya. And let us not forget Arab Spring.

With so much attention being paid to mobile, on stage and in the hallways, plus showing products that were still months away from release just to increase the mobile buzz, I had to ask if Bentley was getting carried away: "Was Bentley throwing everything it had in development of apps for mobile devices, and in the process ignoring the desktop use that was its bread and butter?" After all, most of Bentley users still do work on desktops; most content is created and processed on desktops. Aren't these mobile devices just eye candy?

I sought the Bhupinder Singh, Bentley's level-headed SVP, who is responsible of overall product strategy. Bhupinder explained to me that, No, Bentley still had its feet on the ground, and was quite respectful of its desktop apps.

Bentley is moving forward on the mobilization of data. Bhupinder reiterated what Greg Bentley  mentioned, that the production of data was the domain of the desktop, but increasingly the consumption of data needed to be on mobile devices.

For example, once a public agency owns the plans for an infrastructure project, they could be made available to the public -- and for commercial projects. Bentley acquired InspecTech, which gets data from bridge inspections and provides it customers -- although for security concerns the data is not publicly available.

For wide access to data, Bentley would provide servers. Conversion software (such as its i-model technology) on the servers would allow data to be consumed in Revit, MicroStation, or something else. It should all just work. Truly mobile data; no data in silos.

This might work for public data, which is captured at the expense of the public. However, wouldn't this leave vast blank areas with no access to data or areas of private data created by private companies? For example, a LIDAR scan is done of a shopping center; the owner might have no interest in making its data available to others, even for the common good.

(The exception is a big one. Google has provided considerable data for anybody and everybody in the form of Google Earth. But Google can afford the largesse. It makes billions of dollars of profit. A thousand vehicles with multi-lense cameras to ply every paved road? No problem. CAD companies just aren't that size.)

But since I regularly hear about how Bentley it is at the root of every major infrastructure project in the world, I press on. Bhupinder senses where I'm going with this. Of course, Bentley is hardly the size of Google. It cannot behave like a charitable concern, like Google is. It has to make money.

But why not have Bentley act as the broker of the data its customers own? It is in an ideal position to do so. The terabytes of point clouds of processing plants. the BIM data... even whole cities, dams, bridges, water treatment plants... and more. Collectively, it would be a vast amount of useful data.

Instead of it being stored and archived in private solos (Greg Bentley calls this data mortality), here is a chance for Bentley to play a part in making the data available and useful, making itself the data steward for the world's infrastructure data. Granted, Bentley cannot do this all for free, but who could fault them for charging a small brokerage fee, as it were, in effect, to create a marketplace for companies to gain income from data it has already created.

 

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.]

Dassault Conference, Pt 2: Dassault Plans World Domination

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

Dassault Systemes has identified so many industries it means to conquer that it seems to me like a plan for world domination. Here are some of the industries mentioned at the 3DExperience conference:

• 
  Architecture and construction
• Energy 
• Apparel and fashion 
• Medical 
• Mining 
• Banking 

There were more, but my head was starting to spin. To say it is an ambitious plan is an understatement. Each industry already has its entrenched leaders, with known and respected industry expertise. What would the maker of CATIA know about fashion, for example? Sure it can show me the next Boeing jet on airport runways, but can it simulate the spring collection on models as they sashay down Paris runways? 

Dassault CEO Bernard Charles does not seem to be bothered by such considerations. Dassault Systemes has its roots in Dassault, the aircraft company, from which it was a small step to the design facilities of Boeing, Airbus… just about every major aerospace company, commercial or military.

If you allow yourself to think of cars as airplanes without wings, you can see how success in aerospace would have translated into the automotive market. As engineers hold airplanes and cars as the finest examples of their craft, Dassault products next got a warm welcome from many manufacturing companies. 

But what of AEC, where the Dassault brand has little cachet?

How can Dassault establish credibility in so many diverse industries, in which its aerospace and automotive pedigree matters not, where nobody knows about CATIA, or may never have heard about Dassault fighter planes?

Dassault Mines for Credibility

With the recent Gemcom acquisition, CEO Bernard Charles gave a hint of how he hopes Dassault will achieve credibility as he targets new industries. 

CATIA and SolidWorks were probably in use for the design of earth mining machinery. But what of the geologic analysis, the planning, management of the mines, etc.? Dassault was only scratching the surface [ha ha, get it?]. 

Dassault solved this problem by going out and buying the mining software market leader, Gemcom (its product is renamed GEOVIA by the time you read this). Gemcom was such a force to be reckoned with, that mining terms are named after the founder of the company, according to Bernard. Everyone in mining knows Gemcom, like everyone in airplanes knows CATIA. With this acquisition, Dassault bought itself instant credibility. 

Can Dassault keep buying market leading software? The company reports $1.6 billion of cash and cash equivalents. It could buy four more companies the size of Gemcom outright.

Still, miners don’t know the Dassault name. But that is slated to change. Dassault is targeting corporate name recognition from the high vantage of national advertising campaigns (remember the iceberg commercial), along with a marketing maverick. 

If Gemcom serves as an example, look for Dassault to try to achieve market penetration and leadership by buying industry leading software while at the same time increasing its name recognition to the world at large.

Impressing the public, which includes stockholders, other approvers, as well as targeted industries. Why not establish the idea that that Dassault is a huge company with a world vision, one that acts with the whole world in mind? This two-pronged approach, which relies on establishing name familiarity, would be vital in preventing skeptics from asking “Who the heck is Dassault. Don’t they make software that designs airplanes?”

Instead, they would remember a company that is good, green, benign, friendly, smiling… a personification of Bernard Charles himself, intent on saving the world – and, incidentaly, a comany you can count on to do your job.

Dassault Conference, Pt 1: Bernard comes down from the mountain

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

This morning, we heard Bernard Charles, CEO of Dassault Systemes, reveal that he took a 2-3 month break from his duties as CEO. This may have allowed him to contemplate the world, as well as Dassault’s place in it.

He seems to have come down from the mountain with nothing less than a coalescing vision of mankind and technology, parts of which have already spread throughout Dassault divisions. One cannot enter Dassault’s North American headquarters without seeing emblazoned on the doors,

“IF WE... ask the right questions, we can change the world”

He is trying to share his wisdom with us from the stage, but is kind enough to break it down into digestible chunks. We hear about “harmonizing nature, products, and life.” There already had been high-minded messages going out to the public in national ad campaigns, including the iceberg commercial, where a town is created from the desert by towing an iceberg to it.

If you are wondering what all this has to do with CAD, CAM, and CAE, you are not alone. CAD, CAM, and CAE are still in the picture, but under “3D” in the Dassault compass.

Then there’s been the acquisitions of companies whose products seem to be as central to Dassault’s core competencies as Pluto is to the Sun:

• Exalead, a French search engine 
• NetVibes, an online brand monitoring tool 

CAD insiders could make no sense of it. It was just too out-of-the-box. But, I think we were just too small minded. Clearly, Dassault is aiming for much more than the CAD, CAM, and CAE industry. Just how much more is becoming clearer at this conference.

[Reprinted by permission of CAD Insider.]

 

Nobody cares PTC lost $84 million last quarter

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

PTC announced their quarterly results last week. No matter how financial news is framed in a press release sent to us, our news service is trained to distill three key items to formulate the headline:

• Revenue
• Change in revenue
• Profit 

I'm not a financial analyst, but I hold profit as the most important parameter of a business. It's the bottom line. Checking over the PTC press release, I see the revenue dipped a bit, from $339M to $325M, down 5%... but where is the profit, a.k.a. net income? There is no mention of it in the headline, not in the body. I look all the way down to the tables... and Whoa, baby! PTC lost a whopping $84 million. I can hardly believe it. How can this escape being mentioned? (At least GraphicSpeak noticed.) 

I rush to read the transcript of the call, fully expecting the analysts to have flayed PTC management for such a performance. Granted, the executives would not lead with a discussion of the loss; who would want to? But there is no question of it: no where in the whole transcript does the $84M figure come up. Rather, the analyst seem to be a bit upbeat about the company.

I'm thinking PTC has somehow transfixed the audience... maybe served them some Kool Aid. Then, to further my confusion the next day, PTC stock rises.

All my knowledge of finance, or just the basic principles, limited as they are to revenue and profit (which have served me since I had a paper route), all must have been turned on their head. If the analysts (financial whizzes, unlike me) don't have a problem with losing $84M, I have to be doing something wrong.

I must find out why there is no hue and cry over the enormous loss:

• Is it because the company still paid a dividend to its investors?
• There is a a tax item of $120M that seems to me to have singlehandedly given PTC this huge loss. Was this a one time occurrence, and it is OK to ignore it. Inquiring (non-financial) minds need to know.
• Or does it have to do with the $230M PTC paid to acquire Servigistics?

I hope its not, because PTC still has almost $500M in the bank, and they could lose money at this rate for several years before people get worried.

[Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.]

 

Dassault Debuts Compass Magazine

by Roopinder Tara, Tenlinks.com

Dassault chose the opening press reception of its annual US conference and user meeting (formerly Dassault Systemes Customer Conference, or DSSC), to announce Compass, its new in-house print magazine.

Compass is printed in France, available in several languages (including English), and features subjects as far reaching as CEO Bernard Charles' vision, which extends far beyond the mere design of planes, trains, and automobiles. Its debut issue is hardly the nuts-and-bolts user interest stories of Contact magazine (Dassault's old in-house magazine), but is meant to appeal to a "higher" level of reader: those further up the corporate food chain. In its debut issue are departments such as Society, Education, Art... it even has book club recommendations.

If anything, Compass wants to put a focus on 3DEXPERIENCE, the concept which Dassault has been mentioning in just about every corporate communiqué for a several months now.

It's a beautiful magazine. Glossy. Big. It will look great in corporate office lobbies, which I am sure is its intention. It looks like money. Trade press publishers, most trying just to keep the lights on, will be jealous. Vanity press, they'll say. Does anyone read that stuff?

The Compass debut issue opens to Bernard Charles smiling face. Turn the page, and Monica Menghini, executive  vp of marketing communications, greets us from her own page. Almost lost in the ensuing fine print is chief editor Michael Marshall.

Michael, who handles customer stories for Dassault, tells me that anyone and everyone who wants it can subscribe; you don't have to be a Dassault customer. Michael tells me of stories he is going to be working on. New technologies. Interesting people. Now I'm jealous. 

The magazine features advertising for Dassault partners, including NVIDIA, Lenovo, Wacom, others -- though in the debut issue, the ads were gratis. 

Is it any wonder that big companies put out its own magazine? Google does it. So does Bentley, ANSYS. MSC. They are bright, colorful magazines on thick paper. It leaves companies free to create their own marketing vehicles, promote the customers they are proud of, brag of new products and initiatives. They can break free of page limits imposed by trade press and not be subjected to the editors who change the stories -- if they run them at all.

Find out more, and subscribe, at www.3ds.com/compassmag

 [Reprinted with permission of CAD Insider.]