Synchronous Technology- A Revolutionary Technology Seeks a Revolution

Synchronous Technology looks like a big technology breakthrough for solid modeling. Being able to change a part at will -- without having to first understand how it was created -- will be like flying after being used to walking. I expect Synchronous Technology, or perhaps some variant of it, to reduce history-based modeling to a historic relic. We're going to realize that we all didn't go 3D because of history-based modeling, we went 3D in spite of it. So compelling is Synchronous Technology.

But I must take a deep breath before I promise a revolution. I have to remember Synchronous Technology is still only a technology, part of Solid Edge, part of UG. To get it, you have to buy one of those applications. That may be what Siemens PLM is banking on. But for the existing MCAD user, that is asking a lot. Changing religion might be easier.

It's hard to imagine an existing customer of SolidWorks or Pro/E volunteering to switch to Solid Edge, despite the advantage Synchronous Technology offers. CAD users are quite stubborn. While being able to edit or change a solid model is a clear advantage with Synchronous Technology, it may not compensate for the years of investment in their existing MCAD software. Who wants to go back to school to learn another application? How can you turn your back on the hundreds of legacy models already created?

After creating a compelling technology, Siemens PLM now needs to create a bridge to it. 

Comments

[Jon Banquer]

"SolidEdge’s ST technology is not new technology to the industry as many believe that it is (refer to many posts from longtime users in the industry)."

Without a doubt Solid Edge with ST is new technology. Live Rules is what's new in Solid Edge with ST.

What makes Solid Edge with ST so compelling is a much better user interface that blows the doors off the typical low-level implementation of Move Face.

A combination of history based modeling and what Solid Edge with ST is doing is useful only until ST (or a variant of ST) matures and gets more powerful.

IronCAD has made every marketing mistake in the book. IronCAD has refused to take on SolidWorks and Pro/E head to head and slug it out forcing potential buyers to understand how bad history based modeling is at working with non-native solids and with trying to understand someone else's design intent.

IronCAD could have been a much bigger player if IronCAD had been marketed correctly and I see no sign of life in that area, Cary.

[Cary O'Connor]

SolidEdge’s ST technology is not new technology to the industry as many believe that it is (refer to many posts from longtime users in the industry). IRONCAD has had this ability to support history and non-history since 1998 when it released. We do give credit that SolidEdge has improved the UI to some of the commands in the non-history mode which we are looking to improve in IRONCAD for our release in 2009. However, this post has mentioned an interesting question about the conversion of the entire model history to the ST type and the issues that it may present. Would the ability to support both history and non-history in a single structure be more powerful to the user? Meaning could you combine only the features necessary for the direct (non-history) modification while preserving the rest of the full history model that retains features relations and sketch information for editing. This would allow direct editing on imported data (no features), editing in a history structure model with parametrics, and editing on only the needed features of the history structure model while retaining the remaining features. Even if you are working on imported data or features that are converted to non-history, would it be useful to convert some of the data back to a history based feature? Sure enough this is what IRONCAD supports and has a patent protecting this capability single structure of both history and non-history features. If you are not familiar with IRONCAD capabilities, please visit www.ironcad.com and request for more information to get a tailored demonstration to see how the benefits will fit your needs.

Jon, you seem to have experience with SolidEdge’s ST and I would like to discuss with you how IRONCAD compares and differs from this technology. Please feel free to email me if you would like to discuss these differences.

[Jon Banquer]

"Or do i have to "convert" the models from history approach to direct approach (ST) without a way to get back ??"

You have this correct. Once you convert to using a Synchronous Technology approach your history is gone and you can't go back.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

[Ulrich Hanisch]

It makes me curious to heard about ST the first time. I´ve imbibed the history based parametric approach with my mother's milk, because SWX was my first and is still my main CAD experience. So i was very anxious to learn more about ST. In the meantime, I´ve heard and read a little about ST, and there´s one big question, which maybe can be answered in this blog. Is there a way to switch back from ST to the standard way of modeling a PRT or ASM ?? Or do i have to "convert" the models from history approach to direct approach (ST) without a way to get back ?? It´s just because of this: if i want to convert my models, i can convert to the other, first shooting star in the "direct modeling season" as well. Or is SpaceClaim just a shooting comet ...

Ulrich Hanisch
Germany

[Jon Banquer]

Adam,

"Unfortunately, newbies may not fully appreciate the full power of ST, so Siemens ends up in a catch 22."

Your right.

Very aggressive and focused marketing targeted at SoildWorks and Pro/E failing miserably at working with non-native solids as well failing at collaboration is the only way Siemens is going to change the mentality that exists now.

Siemens shows now signs of doing what needs to be done to change how they market Solid Edge with ST.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

[Adam]

Unfortunately, newbies may not fully appreciate the full power of ST, so Siemens ends up in a catch 22. The ones who get it, won't change, the ones who can start with it, don't get it.

[R. Paul Waddington]

Well Jon, I've done my bit for them: asked into a site today to quote on Inventor, I did, but suggested they look closely at Solid Edges Sync.Tech' before they go much further. As newbies to the 3D modelling world it might be a better place to start.
Lets see if the S E sales guys 'step-up to the plate'.

[Jon Banquer]

"Jon's 'downloadable' approach has a lot going for it so long as it is followed up by an attentive and helpful (not pushy)sales and support crew."

Paul,

I can assure you that they are attentive and not pushy when it comes to support.

The problem is they are not hard-hitting or confrontational when it comes to sales where PTC and SolidWorks are.

When it comes to sales of CAD I firmly believe you have to been pushy and confrontational with the customer or you don't win the account. No one wants to admit this but it's true and it's what is needed.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

[R. Paul Waddington]

I'm with you guys; Synchronous Technology, and similar methods definitely have a place in the 3D modelling space, but the trick is bringing it to peoples notice.

Jon's 'downloadable' approach has a lot going for it so long as it is followed up by an attentive and helpful (not pushy)sales and support crew.

[Jon Banquer]

Could not agree more with what you have to say Roopinder.

Sadly Siemens doesn't get what they need to do to get SolidWorks and Pro/E users to switch. I've laid out what needs to be done by Siemens to start the revolution you speak of on my blog:

http://jonbanquer.wordpress.com/

Limited 30 day demos needing special passwords, mailing DVD's of Solid Edge with ST instead of making a trail version of Solid Edge with ST downloadable are examples of areas where Siemens has no clues.

Why not have a downloadable version of SolidEdge with ST that has 25 free saves? After that make it so it doesn't save any longer. Also make the downloadable demo version of Solid Edge with ST have files that can't be opened in the for sale version of Solid Edge with ST.

I feel these are marketing basics and Siemens just doesn't seem to get the basics of how to really penetrate this market. Siemens very slow and subtle approach to Solid Edge with ST hasn't and won't work.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA