« Autodesk and Bloggers Still Enjoying The Honeymoon | Main | Actify Changes Management »

May 11, 2006

Comments

Solid7

Has anyone ever considered the legal aspect of the Catia vs. SW fiasco? Sure, we all want to have a villain for our day to day soap opera - but Catia is built on Spatial technology, and SW is built on Parasolid. There are licensing issues, and because UGS/Siemens/whoever they are this week own the kernel, they have some say in how the technology is used, and accessed.

Wow, where did that come from? And how come it doesn't get mentioned more often? It's easier to be frustrated than rational, that's why.

Who would really think that Dassault would intentionally keep the products at a level of incompatibility of this nature? The Catia/PLM software is entirely scalable, and SW would make a welcome addition, if that was the stated purpose. In reality, it's (Catia) a different software for a different user base. But it's easy for Joe Daily User to spout off about cost and perceived sales tactics, when they've, in reality, never even begun to scratch the surface of (most likely) either product's full capability. How many SW users even know about the CAA, RADE and KnowledgeWare capabilities of Catia? Or PLM integration? If you know anything about any of this stuff, you surely know that SW is not "Catia Lite", nor has it ever been meant to be.

EngineeringPro


I looked at the list (http://www.proengineer.com/founda.php) Foundation has a CATIA Interface AND ProSurface? Nice.

me again

John McEleney writes, "It is my personal belief that no one product can serve the needs of the single user up to the largest enterprises in the world."

PTC/ProE provides EXACTLY that - from the ever growing installed base of single-few user outfits (i.e. SMB) through to Boeing, Mattel, Raytheon, Caterpillar, Ferrari, etc. etc. - there's just one product platform, truly scalable from concept through engineering, analysis, tooling and manufacturing (and more) to product lifecycle management.

Jon Banquer

"For example, one has to wonder why Solidworks, with all the bright brains behind their product, has never made any attempt to address complex surface modeling. Instead users must rely on add-ons or other surface modelers, such as Rhino or Alias/Autodesk StudioTools. Don't tell me they have no clue on how to handle curvature continuity..."

I've said the same thing for many years on Usenet and in upFront.eZine.

What also should be mentioned is just how badly SolidWorks does at handling non-native data.

Only companies really addressing the non-native data situation are Kubotek with KeyCreator and Think3 with thinkID.

It's really sad that thinkID is so poorly marketed in the US. It's a great product.

Jon Banquer
Phoenix, Arizona

By making the two products separate, DS avoids internal competition, and this is more important to them then the will of a few customers. That's as simple as that.

If SW and CATIA start to "talk" better, then SW will very quickly enter into CATIA's user base causing an overall loss for DS since SW is much cheaper than CATIA. And the competion will not be just between the products, but of course between the employees behind each product. Being from two different countries is sure to make things worse.

UGS is indeed taking a different approach. Time will tell which one will prevail. For now UGS is losing money so I guess that what is good for the customers is not necessarily good for the vendor...

The issue of needing a mid-range AND a high-end CAD package is real, and is present in lots of company. For example, a very complex part can be designed in the high-end package, and the tooling can be designed in the mid-range package for ease of use and cost effectiveness.

UGS is the only one that I know who adressed this issue, with Solid Edge as the mid-range and NX as the high-end CAD tool. It offers an unmatched inter-operability, meaning that you can import native NX files into Solid Edge and it keeps its associativity if the NX part changes. Furthermore, it both uses the UGS-owned Parasolid 3D kernel, so the translation is pretty seemless.

Now, speaking of translation, can you name a company that had problems migrating from Catia V4 to V5?

Jaspreet Singh Hothi

Buying a 3rd party translator from Capvidia may simply be more cost effective than developing it inhouse. Maybe Mr.John McEleney can clear this point.

John McEleney

It is my personal belief that no one product can serve the needs of the single user up to the largest enterprises in the world. Want simple proof: people vote with their wallets (why else would we have both CATIA and AutoCAD)

It was exactly this philosophy that led us to merge with DS approximately 9 years ago. I remember hearing all of the comments that DS was going to limit SolidWorks, the company was going to get crushed, management was going to leave... at the time I told people that time will tell. You can say what you want, however in those 9 years, we have continued to remain focused on building great products and delievering great service to our customers. We have been rewarded by our customers - the best proof is the growth of our base from almost nothing to well over 1/2 million users and our revenues have grown 30X in that same period.

Our strategy is simple and it's working, we call it:2 Markets; 2 Leaders.

I believe you need to look at the relative overlap of the markets (think of it as centers of gravity). Our estimates (backed by data) is that the relative overlap of the markets are approximately 5-10%. This has nothing to do with the geometry created, it has more to do with the integrated applications that people want/need to use, the problems they are trying to solve and how they want to be supported.

If you were in my shoes would you focus your resources on the 5-10% part of the market or the 90-95% of the market?

Let me be clear, the need for people to share information between SolidWorks and CATIA is very real, we feel this is best solved by people who are focussed 100% of their time on this problem.


John

ps. Je parlais Francais (I speak French because I was a foreign exchange student while in high school).

kaydee

Dassault and SolidWorks are talking... Dassault/Catia is making sure they keep the Solidworks team in check so that they do not start to expand their reach into Catia's strengths.
For example, one has to wonder why Solidworks, with all the bright brains behind their product, has never made any attempt to address complex surface modeling. Instead users must rely on add-ons or other surface modelers, such as Rhino or Alias/Autodesk StudioTools. Don't tell me they have no clue on how to handle curvature continuity...
As for data translation, it fits into the same strategy: keep both products as separate as possible, and nobody has to learn french.

Anonymous

By allowing themselves to be bought by a French company, they keep Wall St off their backs and are not similarly accountable like US based CAD/CAM/CAE/PLM companies

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.