The editor replies: "I was too busy to attend -- updating books and renovating the basement of my house. Over the years, I have found A/E/C Systems less useful for finding out about new products (the Web has replaced it); for the last several years, I attended mainly to meet people. I am, however, pleased to present a report by Martyn Day."
"Thanks for your personalized response, Ralph. The main reason I asked
is because, although I did not attend the show, I was given the impression
(and was eager to see it confirmed/refuted by an independent source) that
this year's show was, more than ever, about intranet/ extranet/ project
management solutions, collaborative engineering, etc. and less about desktop
CAD. I find that an interesting trend, and look forward to Martyn's report.
"Good luck with the basement!"
-- Mike Gilronan
Another year, another A/E/C Systems, and another case of information bulimia. Spend three days gorging on news and industry information, digest for a while, and then throw up the partly digested thoughts for this newsletter.
The show was poorly attended in terms of bodies in the aisles; the total show space also looked smaller. During the Autodesk dinner for the press, ceo Carol Bartz commented. "I don't know why we are here [at the show]." The next day, Bentley Systems and Autodesk told Penton [owners of A/E/C Systems] that they wold not sign up for the next year. Intergraph wasn't there this year.
The view at my table was that shows, in their present form, have had their day, and that something new is required. Mike Evans (of Cambashi) suggested that small, specialized shows are the way forward. John Lynch (of Design Variations) thought the CAD companies were equally to blame, since year-on-year they show the same old technology with a few tweaks here and there. I wouldn't be surprised if Penton attempts a Daratech-type conference or something next year. Talking with a number of other exhibitors, however, many were happy with the quality of leads.
Talking about solid modeling kernels, ceo Keith Bentley didn't completely rule out maintaining both the Parasolid and ACIS kernels in MicroStation, like IronCAD. Keith Bentley admitted that commercial reality meant Windows 95/98/NT was currently the only platform supported by MicroStation/J. He is keenly watching the emerging Linux market; Bentley is one of the few commercial CAD vendors to have a solution ported to Linux. TriForma has become a mature product with what looks to be smart HVAC and civil versions. I hear that there has been some trimming of folks at Bentley; I think this is prior to its IPO attempt next year.
My perception from the show is that Bentley is very serious in becoming the "project-oriented" design company out there. It was refreshing to see less EEM bobbins, and more products demonstrated, working together to form a complete solution. At the Bentley dinner for the press, George Church (of Workplace Systems) said that NASA had spent millions of dollars evolving a project Web system, but had started off on the wrong foot, and ended up losing the plans for the Saturn V rocket. One journalist yelled out, "Have they tried Beijing?" <g>.
At Autodesk's press conference, they showed a video of how Autodesk saw the future of CAD. The basic plot showed a woman architect sitting at a big LCD screen (laid out like a drawing board) talking to two people via on-screen video links (civil engineer, on-site architect -- I guessed). They talk through two or three design changes together, she speaks to the computer, and it shows if there are any problems/clashes in 3D and 2D. Once done, everyone is happy! That was about it. It's one thing to pull out a strong vision of the future; it's another to show how the current technology maps into this. There was no link to current technology, nor a mention of the infrastructure required.
On the object side of things, I went through some of the intricacies of AutoCAD 2000's new ObjectDBX API. Autodesk has exposed the objects through two new developer layers: OMI via Active X, and OMF using the object foundations. It looks to me like a solution to passing objects about in an AutoCAD environment; outside AutoCAD, you are still stuffed. LT is the only thing in the Autodesk bag that's clearly left out of the object picture -- no ObjectDBX layer for it.
There were plenty of Autodesk demos on hand, but the majority was given to me under non-discosure agreements. Two products I can mention are CAD Overlay 2000 and Land Development Desktop 2000 (LDT). CAD Overlay appears to have had a major overhaul and has pretty much closed the gap with GTX and Rasterex's competitive solutions. The old Image Systems (then Softdesk, and now Autodesk) guys have pulled out all the stops to produce the best version to date.
My initial impression of LDT was that it was pretty buggy -- these appear to have been addressed in the latest 2000 compatible release, in what is ostensibly a flat port.
Autodesk appeared to feel good about the fact that it was making the viewing of DWG files free by giving away its Volo viewer. This non-commercial move, on the surface, benefits all users and is to be commended. The cynic in me, however, sees this as a shrewd move to promote the proprietary DWG format as a standard and, since Volo is based on Autodesk's ObjectDBX technology, custom objects should be at least viewable -- giving the perception that Autodesk's custom objects aren't as proprietary as they actually are.
There will be an AEC-specific (i.e. lighweight solids) version of ACIS released by Spatial later this year. BricsNet looks to be the first to implement it. Which makes it all the more weird, since Visio's IntelliCAD itself doesn't support ACIS modelling! It appeared to me that the ACIS model was built outside of IntelliCAD, and then displayed through the Visio interface.
The AutoCAD version is due next year, and will be interesting to see how Autodesk's AEC team reacts to officially sanctioned competition. It's highly likely that BricsNet will not use the object definitions that Autodesk uses in Architectural Desktop. The combination of IntelliCAD with BricsNet Architect is expected to retail for US$700, with a yearly update subscription of US$300. The AutoCAD version will come out next year with a price of around US$1,000.
The launch also included a number of architecture-specific Web services from affiliated companies: AECInfo.com, and project extranet specialists Evolv, the latter of which BricsNet has taken an equity position. The presentation was given by ex-Bentley employee, Maarten van Emmerik, now cto of BricsNet; I noted that a number of Bentley executives attended the launch.
It as great to meet up with John Lynch of Design Variations, ex-cto of Autodesk, and his architectural product. The parametric solution appeared to have a number of novel features and its ease of use rivaled products like Visio Technical, I simply dragged, dropped and modified.
Chatting with John, we couldn't help but touch on the Autodesk's object issue, since he was there when ObjectARX was added into the mix. Design Variation software doesn't use objects in its product, and John could certainly see the limitations of ObjectARX.
'Cadalyst' magazine is covering non-Autodesk CAD from August. CADalyst's WebWorks ezine already has begun reporting on non-Autodesk CAD systems.
I must admit that for me it was the best A/E/C Systems show ever, in terms of access to the software developers, CEOs, and product demos.
[Martyn Day is the group editor for 'CADD,' 'CADdesk' and 'MicroStation User Europe' magazines. He is located in London, England. -- Ed.]
In the awards ceremony, it was announced that every single team placed either first or second in at least one of the 19 categories. The ArchiCAD Team won best overall and becomes a new trustee and current holder of the Architectural CADD Cup.
The 5th Design Shootout will be held June 3 '00 in Washington DC USA at A/E/C Systems '00. Already signed up are the ARRIS, VectorWorks, and the defending ArchiCAD Team. http://www.architecturalcadd.com/shootout.html
Intergraph two years ago sued Intel for patent infringement, illegal coercive behavior, and antitrust violations of the Sherman Act. Whether Intel is guilty of patent infringement will be determined at trial next year. http://www.intergraph.com/intel/
In a powerful testimonial to Dean's influence, Greg Robinson announced he is organizing a July 23rd farewell event to thank Dean. "I'm asking everyone to spread the word. Let's pull together and have the largest meeting we have ever had!"
Greg requests all interested volunteers, sponsors, and attendees to register at the SVAPU Web site http://www.power.org/about/feedback.htm or email with ideas and assistance. Other email contacts are Steve Wells, SVAPU vp. Possible sponsors plase contact greg@think3.com
Cyco Software
Autodesk has announced that it has closed a licensing agreement that
will permit Cyco to use Autodesk's ObjectDBX For AutoCAD 2000 technology
in its AutoManager product lines.
Eagle Point Software
Civil/Survey 99 is now translated, localized, and available in Japan
from Kozo Keikaku Engineering, the authorized Eagle Point Japanese distributor.
Eagle Point plans to broaden its international coverage to at least eight
more languages in 1999.
Parametric
Technology
Pro/MECHANICA 2000i is the newest member of the PTC i-Series of mechanical
design automation software. This app allows users to evaluate and optimize
the mechanical performance of product designs in real-world situations,
reducing the need for expensive physical prototypes and enhancing overall
product quality.
Joe (walking into McDonalds): Hi, I'd like a Big
Mac.
Cashier: Okay, here's your Big Mac and here's your Coke.
That'll be $3.99.
Joe: Uh, I don't want a Coke.
Cashier: Sorry, they're bundled.
Joe: What? I'm not paying for a Coke!
Cashier: You don't; the Coke is free.
Joe: But wasn't a Big Mac $2.49 last week?
Cashier: Sure, but this latest Big Mac is far more innovative.
It's got integrated Coke!
Joe: I already bought a Snapple across the street...
I'm not going to drink the Coke.
Cashier: Then you can't have the burger.
Joe: Okay, fine, I will pay the $3.99 and throw the Coke
away.
Cashier: Oh, you can't do that. They're seamlessly integrated.
Totally inseparable.
Joe: How can that be? They're two totally separate things!
Cashier: No, watch. (takes Big Mac, dunks it in the
Coke) See?
Joe: Why did you just do that?!
Cashier: It's a benefit to the consumer. Otherwise, you'd
end up with two different, inconsistent tastes. This way you're assured
of a continuous taste across all your foods.
Joe: Ohhh.
-- Thanks to the CAD SIG of the Boston
Computer Society.