March 16, 2004
Issue
#377
< Previous Issue Next >
T
H E B U S I N E S S O F C A
D
|
March 16, 2004 < Previous Issue Next >
|
|
|
- - - C
O N T E N T S This
AutoCAD Upgrade Makes Sense Dassault
4Q03 - - - Below
the Radar - - - Donate Write - - - Look for additional,
nearly-daily CAD commentary at our Weblog: (ADVERTISMENT) Updated and Expanded for AutoCAD 2004! Tailoring AutoCAD 2004 is the first book for AutoCAD 2004. Download as a 204-page e-book in PDF format (US$24.95) or on CD ($29.95). Covers all areas of customization, from changing the user interface to writing toolbar macros and LISP routines. Click here to sample preview pages and place your order.
|
UGS PLM Solutions Gets Quadra-Ownership EDS announced Sunday to whom it is selling its CAD division: the management of UGS PLM Solutions, plus three private equity firms. Price tab is US$2.05 billion for the company that produces Unigraphics NX, Solid Edge, and other CAD-related software. The three equity firms invest in technology, but have little CAD experience:
The new owners say they plan no changes to the business and its 5,000 employees, and that current ceo Tony Affuso stays on. EDS needs the two billion dollars to help pay down its $5 billion of debt. The sales price is 2.4x annual revenues, somewhat higher than expected due to a bidding war against another group of investors -- Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Golden Gate Capital, and Texas Pacific Group. - - - The sale changes the dynamics of the CAD industry. Instead of being the minor 4%-division of a $21-billion-a-year corporation, UGS PLM Solutions will be its own company in June -- taking its place with Dassault Systemes and Autodesk as the three largest CAD companies in the world. (Last year, the division made $104 million profit on revenues of $897 million.) Will the investment companies know how to run the CAD company? Although one of them has experience with Alibre, we don't think the three will hang on to UGS PLM Solutions for long. Rather, this is a stepping stone to taking the company public, and profiting from the sale. EDS promises more details in April. BricsCad plans to ship a Linux-friendly version IntelliCAD this summer. It won't be a pure port; instead, it will run on Linux using WINE. (WINE is an emulator that lets Windows applications run on Linux. Windows applications make calls to the operating system using Microsoft-written hooks; WINE emulates these calls, and translates them into the best equivalent in Linux-ese.) BricsCad says they have a stable version running; it installs using the Linux rpm utility. To take part in the beta test, send an email to linux @ bricscad.com . Your computer needs Linux, and the most recent release of WINE; WineSetupTk is recommended with default settings. The company expects to release the software in English, Czech, French, German, Italian, Polish, Russian and Spanish, and hopes to make a splash in the thus-far elusive Linux-based CAD market. We look forward to hearing of readers' experiences with IntelliCAD on Linux. Intergraph is one of the oldest of CAD companies, also selling the hardware on which customers ran the software. It even developed its own CPU, called Clipper, and was (I think) the very first company to ship a computer with Intel's Pentium CPU. The relationship between Intergraph and Intel turned sour after Intel allegedly bullied Intergraph into giving over technology that sped up calculations performed by Clipper (through the use of parallel instructions, called PIC). That technology is in every Pentium and Itanium CPU, and now Intergraph wants Intel and all other computer vendors to pay royalties on its patents. For the first couple of years, it has been largely successful. But events over the last few months are changing the picture. What first began as a "simple" lawsuit between the two has mushroomed into an all-out war in the hardware industry. Here's a timeline: 2001 July: Intergraph files its patent infringement case against Intel. 2002 October: Judge rules the patents were valid, enforceable, and infringed by Intel's Itanium and Itanium 2 products. Intel appeals, but pays a non-refundable settlement of US$150 million to Intergraph. December: Having won initially against Intel, Intergraph now confidently files infringement cases against HP, Dell, and Gateway over the use of memory management patents. The case will be heard August, this year. 2003 January: Intergraph files fifth suit, this time against Texas Instruments, alleging that TI's DSP [digital signal processor] chips also infringe against Intergraph's PIC patent. May: HP files a counterclaim, alleging that Intergraph's patent assertions violate the Sherman Antitrust Act (which makes it illegal to restrain inter-state and foreign trade). June: Dell files a counterclaim against Intel. September: TI agrees to pay Intergraph $18 million and to license Intergraph's patents. 2004 January: Advanced Micro Devices launches an action against Intergraph, saying that its Clipper patents are invalid, or else are not infringed by AMD's CPUs. Although Intergraph held talks with with AMD, AMD says it launched the action after it received a subpoena that led it to believe it was going to be sued by Intergraph. Whew! That's eight law suits swirling about. February: The appeals judge disagrees with one aspect of Intergraph's win over Intel. "The lower court had erred in its construction of the term 'pipeline identifier.' In summary, the appeals court concluded that a 'pipeline identifier' as defined in Intergraph’s patents must identify the specific processing pipeline -- not just a type of processing pipeline -- to which a computer instruction will be routed." The case is sent back to the lower courts. Stay tuned for more. Below the Radar A summary of CAD industry news you may not have read elsewhere, or that we found interesting: - - - Archway Systems changes the pricing of VersaCAD to reflect the total number of employees of the purchaser. For example, 1-5 employees is US$1,000, while more than 100 employees is $4,000. Price includes one year of updates and tech support. www.versacad.com IMSI ships TurboCAD Professional 10 (US$795) with deformable modeling using NURBS, creation of solids from surfaces and vice versa, and more. Autodesk increases the price of AutoCAD LT 2005 to US$899. Chart of LT's max-avg-min selling-price history at www.pricescan.com/graphs/graph148111.asp VirtualCAD unveils Custom CAD Modeler technology -- it lets customers of manufacturers of custom mechanical components dimension their parts, and download the CAD models of those custom parts. www.virtualcad.com/CCM.php MITCalc has released two new modules for its Mechanical Calculations package: force couplings of shafts with hubs, and slender strut (column) buckling. http://www.mitcalc.com Dassault Systèmes releases of Version 5 Release 13 (aka V5R13) of CATIA, ENOVIA, SMARTEAM, and DELMIA software. plm.3ds.com/V5R13 Advanced Computer Solutions joins the OpenDesign Alliance as a "founding member." Its Caddie software helps with construction drawings. GlobalCAD's Exchange 2004 helps deploy CAD standards across networks. www.globalcad.com And FTSS is developing a suite of crash test dummy models for ABAQUS for software-based crashworthiness simulation. www.abaqus.com Seminars and Conferences San Francisco Bay Area Technology Forum is Mar 31 at the Jack London Inn, Oakland CA USA. www.siliconevents.org/visio . Microsoft is apparently releasing the new Visio 2004 at this user group meeting. Intergraph's GeoSpatial World 2004 is May 12-14 in Miami Beach FL USA. www.geospatialworld.com Solid Edge User Summit 2004 takes place Jun 2-4 at Disney World in Orlando FL USA. www.solidedge.com/summit 19th Annual International Forum on Design for Manufacture and Assembly is Jun 22-23 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, Providence-Warwick RI USA. www.dfma.com/forum Tap your PalmPilots: AEC Systems 05 Conference is Jan 18-20 '05 at the Las Vegas Convention Center. People/Companies on the Move Autodesk halts its 'Toplines' e-newsletter for its customers. RAND Worldwide has Trent Brown joining as executive vp of worldwide sales, and chief operating officer. Mr Brown is the former executive vp of international sales with Parametric Technology Corp. In other news, RAND sells its Austrian subsidiary to its managers. Techsoft-Rand Technologies GmbH is located in Linz, Austria. WorthWhile Web http://online.wsj.com/article_email/article_print Letters to the Editor Re: AutoCAD 2005 "I agree with the other readers who think Autodesk should work on big changes, and leave the polish of commands to us (the Lisp'ers and VBA'ers). "When Autodesk does include a new command
for a task that we have automated years ago, like drafting standards
it's a lot of clicking in dialog boxes -- instead of one simple
button or command to fix the layers, colors, and so on."
"Darren Young wrote a pretty good editorial in defense of Autodesk regarding the negativism surrounding AutoCAD 2005. The roar seems to come across pretty loud that users are agitated. May I offer a humble opinion from a small firm CAD manager's perspective? "Darren is mostly right. Autodesk has finally started paying attention to tools that improve what AutoCAD is supposed to do: draft. I know it's kind of low tech compared to 3D modelers, but the program is supposed to be the toolset to produce design documents that are primarily a mixture of the graphical and the lexical. Hence, good tools for both drawing and text objects satisfy very basic needs. And the third-party software industry that thrives in its wings keeps us going with all the little necessary custom tools for our own niches. "However, I truly differ with Darren on his parting comment: 'If AutoCAD 2005 sales do poorly, it'll be a result of people being complacent about accepting what's handed to them, and not demanding real insight and imagination.' "We are a small (16-person) structural engineering consulting firm, and I (the multi-hat wearing CAD manager) spent a good month setting up AutoCAD 2004. Because 2004 offered so much with the addition of tool palettes, it behooved us to set up a good set of palettes with much of our firm's customization and standards in place. There were programs to write, schemes to figure out, troubleshooting to take care of before this was rolled out to the users I customize for. "I believe the reason AutoCAD 2005 will fail to compel some users to upgrade is simply timing and maturity. An annual headache like upgrading is way too much to ask of most of us in the AEC world -- especially those of us in smaller firms. We will not be upgrading for at least six months, because it will take that long to get some ROI [return on investment] for the effort put into launching AutoCAD 2004. Additionally, most of our clients (which heavily influences the decision for us) are too cash-strapped to attempt a charge to overhead right now. "It will take time for the others around
us to pressure us into upgrading by either competition or interoperability
issues."
"I take exception to the guest editorial by Mr. Darren Young on two counts: "Considering the added expense and non-billable time it has taken to find, purchase, and load LISP routines, I do not agree that Autodesk does not need to address basic drafting needs that contribute to easier and faster execution of tasks (such as joining lines). For me the role of LISP routines is to address idiosyncratic solutions specific to a unique discipline or style of drafting. I do not think third-party LISP routines or other kinds of add-ons should compensate for gaping holes in universal drafting and modeling functions. "I wish Autodesk would ENVISION how superior a lifelike 3D model is to 2D line art in a sales presentation or in printed documentation. If the use of AutoCAD were solely the province of the manufacturing floor, its outdated 3D tools would be just a minor complaint. But because I have used AutoCAD both as a sales and documentation tool as well as a manufacturing tool, I will continue to take AutoCAD to task until it covers both 2D and 3D equally well. Therefore, I do not agree with Mr. Young that AutoCAD is adequate. "Furthermore, if Autodesk is intentionally
hobbling AutoCAD for the purpose of selling additional applications
at higher prices, such as Inventor or Revit, they may find otherwise
loyal customers looking elsewhere for products that compensate for
AutoCAD s shortcomings."
"With Autodesk trying to ENCOURAGE us
to quit drawing lines at all, so why would they worry about a GLUE
command?"
"I agree with Darren Young that AutoCAD 2005 does have some great new capabilities. Tables and sheets will certainly be very popular. Too bad Autodesk took so long to get around to copying them from the CAD programs that had them first. "Up until Release 13, Autodesk was on-the-ball about copying their competitor's new capabilities, usually within nine to twelve months. "Despite the value of what is in AutoCAD
2005, it's rather sad that this is the best Autodesk can do in a
year's time. Copying old features from competitive products is not
a good indicator of vision, innovation, or leadership."
"I would like to say kudos to Mr. Young. I appreciate his insight and his unique stand in defending Autodesk's latest release. AutoCAD is big target, and Autodesk an even bigger one. In my opinion, Autodesk and its products have become the de facto whipping boy for CAD cynics everywhere. "(I'm not advocating that anyone blindly follow the Marketing Hype or rush out to buy a company's latest software. As a matter of fact, it's prudent to wait some period of time after a new product is released so you're not stuck as a Beta Tester.) "I just think it's become the accepted and popular thing to condemn Autodesk and especially their products, sometimes even before they've been given a fair hearing. I'll admit to being a critic of the company and its products, having had to work with and support their products virtually since its inception. "Where Autodesk has really deserved criticism, in my opinion, is for moving away from a real-world product towards a marketing-driven product. That said, a critic should not simply rush to judgment on a piece of software because that is what the CAD world expects. I always thought a verdict on a CAD package should be based on a users in-the-seat experience with that particular product. "AutoCAD 2005 builds on some of the tools offered in 2004 (tool palettes) and introduces us to a few, very good innovations: sheet sets and the long awaited tables functionality. I think for the time being Autodesk is moving beyond an era of complacency, and is really trying to push its products forward, based on real-world experiences. While you can argue that they still have a long way to go, this may signify a return to what made their products so successful in the past. "While the harshest critics seem to make
the most noise and garner the most attention, it's the people who
use the software daily that should be the ones who determine AutoCAD's
merits. People tend to vote with their pocketbook, and while AutoCAD
has been labeled a 'mature product,' I think it will continue to
define 2D desktop CAD software for many more years." - - - Re: SmartSketch Bundled with Windows Resource CD "To those of us not immersed in the 'business' of the CAD industry, Intergraph's bundle would not have been widely known, because they are not ubiquitous like Microsoft. My hunch is that if IntelliCAD were bundled with Office, it would immediately jump to the #1 CAD position based on seat count. "What I don't understand is how Microsoft,
who develops competing applications in just about every product
category, has given Autodesk a free ride in the CAD realm." Spin Doctor of the Moment "Beagle 2 was the plucky little spaceship
that people in Britain and across the world took to their hearts." Notable Quotable "We're afraid to call it love; let's
call it swimming." |
|
Return to www.upfrontezine.com. Entire contents copyright ©2004 by upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd. All rights reserved worldwide. Article reprint fee $500. All trademarks belong to their respective holders. "upFront.eZine," "Talking About CAD," and "On your desktop every Tuesday morning" are trademarks of upFront.eZinePublishing, Ltd. Letters to the editor may be reproduced in an edited form for clarity and brevity. Opinions expressed in letters are not necessarily shared by upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd. |
This e-newsletter is shareware. You may read this free. If you would like to support the author in his work, we suggest a donation of US$25.00 to PayPal in the account of grabowski @ telus.net. Click here to make payment.
Reprint fee: US$500 |
.
