|
upFront.eZine |
|
|
a
publication from |
|
|
Issue #437 : : June 28, 2005 |
|
|
C o n t e n t s Delcams's Marketing Goes Aggressive Encryption of Data
FIles Under the Radar and other
regular columns. |
Write the Editor. Donate to upFront.eZine with Paypal. Access nearly-daily CAD commentary at our blog: WorldCAD Access.
|
|
|
|
|
Delcam's Marketing Goes Aggressive Delcam announced its plan to outsell PTC by 2006, dollar-wise. The plan, as unveiled by managing director [equivalent to ceo] Hugh Humphreys, is based on statistics released by CIMdata, a market research firm. In the rather narrow niche of software sales to end-users in 2004 (and projected for 2005), the numbers are:
The numbers are small, because they leave out service revenue (a.k.a. subscriptions), consulting, PLM sales, and so on. Add them in, and PTC expects total revenue in 2005 to be $700-$710 million, and hopes to reach $1 billion by 2008. Mr Humphreys counts on his company grow faster than PTC, thus overtaking the once high-flying MCAD vendor. Problem is, his analysis is based on two data points and, as prospectuses always note, past performance is no guarantee of future returns.
Free Data Translation A week later and Delcam is announcing no-charge access to its PS-Exchange online CAD translation service during the first Thursday in July -- for the entire 48 hours it is July 7 in all time zones. You'll need to fill out a survey before submitting translation jobs. The part that I wonder about is the "unlimited use." Will the servers clog up, preventing access? No doubt Delcam marketing will spin that as an "overwhelming response" that "signals huge success." Tying in with Evan Yares' guest editorial (below), Delcam asserts that its translation service "reduced the pressure on toolmakers and other sub-contractors to buy expensive additional software simply to be able to offer data compatibility to their customers. Even so, companies are still intimidated by the major CAD suppliers into buying extra systems that they neither want nor need in the hope that it will help them win contracts with major OEMs." Ah, but will Delcam throw in a 64-bit computer for $500? PTC's retail style Promotion-of-the-Month is an HP Workstation xw8400, Pro/ENGINEER Wilfire Foundation Advantage ($4,995), and Structural & Thermal Simulation module ($2,495) -- all for US$7,994. (So as to not give further free promotion to either company, I won't include URLs for Delcam and PTC.) Encryption of Data Files, Part III Guest Editorial by Evan Yares None of the EULAs [end user license agreements] I've seen prohibit the reverse engineering of the programs' data file formats. (The prohibition is for the licensed programs.) Yet a prohibition effectively exists when vendors use technical measures to make it difficult to reverse engineer formats without also reverse engineering the licensed program.
Data Parameterization One way that vendors have done this is by data parameterizing. For instance, in solid modeling software, vendors might include the parameters for a particularly nasty type of blend, but not include the resultant NURB surface data. In reverse engineering the file, the programmers must look at the program to see how it creates the surface data from the parameters, and then write an algorithm to exactly mimic its behavior. That might require reverse engineering of the program. (Were you to look at the published file format specifications for the major geometric modeling kernels, you’d find such parameterized data descriptions.)
Surreptitious Encryption A more insidious technique is to add surreptitious encryption within the file format, and then embed the decryption key within the program. When caught doing this, CAD vendors have been known to say (in public, and with a straight face) that it is not encryption, but "something else." I've talked to various data encryption experts, and the explanation is simple: rendering data into an unintelligible form through a reversible algorithm, with no primary benefit to the users of that data, is encryption. Another definition of encryption technology is the scrambling and descrambling of information using mathematical formulas or algorithms -- that's the verbatim text from 17 U.S.C. § 1201(g)(1)(B), better known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The danger to vendors using surreptitious encrypting is that the customer's copyrighted work should be obvious to all, but apparently is not. Encryption become the lock on the customer's property to which the vendor holds the key. It's acceptable to place a lock on your own property; when someone else puts on the lock and holds the key, it becomes a problem. Mainstream software vendors, such as Microsoft, Oracle, and Adobe, don't so this sort of thing; it is unfortunate that some CAD vendors do. The DMCA deals at length with issues of encryption and digital content. But it does so in the context of copyright holders using encryption to protect their work. It never deals explicitly with vendors of digital content creation tools embedding encryption within a third-party's copyrighted work. Surreptitious encryption is a pretty obvious technical measure to frustrate interoperability. There are less obvious ways that are nearly as effective.
Selective Licensing One policy that causes tremendous frustration is selective licensing. The term sounds simple enough: vendors choose to whom they will license their software. In the CAD market, most vendors have a policy to not license their software to competitors. This prevents competitors from seeing the software (and possibly matching its capability), but it also prevents competitors from improving interoperability. In addition, most CAD vendors are also selective about licensing their development tools to third-parties. The result is that third-party translator developers often pay large fees, and must, at all costs, avoid upsetting the major vendors.
Interoperability Frustrated The combination of EULA limitations, technical measures, and restrictive business policies allow CAD vendors to frustrate interoperability and limit their customers' ability to use their data. The added insult is the way in which some CAD vendors spin their behavior as promoting openness and interoperability. Most will do anything they can to read competitors' data, and often they make efforts to write those data formats, too. At the same time, they do all they can to prevent anyone else reading or writing their native files. For users of any CAD program, the only data that fully embodies their design is the CAD system's native file format. The moment that data is translated to another format, information is lost. Formats such as SVG, CGM, IGES, STEP, JT, 3D XML, PLM, DWF, and PDF are not acceptable substitutes for native formats, because none of them accurately and completely represent the customers' original design data. If CAD vendors are unwilling to make their native file format specifications available, they're not serving their customers interests -- nor can they claim to be committed to openness and interoperability. (Evan Yares is president of the Open Design Alliance. www.opendesign.com )
A summary of CAD industry news you may not have read elsewhere, or that I found interesting: - - - CoCreate Software plans to offer OneSpace Designer Modeling as a 64-bit application in early 2006. Running on Windows XP Professional x64 and either Intel or AMD 64-bit CPUs, CoCreate says its software will benefit from a larger addressable model space and better performance -- allowing larger assemblies or more complex parts. The current 32-bit version of CoCreate v13.20 already runs on Windows x64, providing access to an extra GB of RAM. www.cocreate.com Solustan's new LinkMotion software acts like a printer driver, making it easier to generate 2-1/2D machining operations. The driver software is compatible with many motion control boards, but runs only on Windows XP. www.solustan.com Rob Berry, Dave Taylor and Jack Zimmer formed The CADCourse team to provide training products for TurboCAD. www.cadcourse.net VB2S has realtime 3D integration of Subdo v1.3 in Acrobat Reader 7. You can see online examples at www.vb2s.com/pdf-u3d.html (in French). Alias DirectConnect for Pro/ENGINEER uses PTC's Granite kernel to directly import native 3D models from Pro/E to Alias' ImageStudio rendering software. www.alias.com/imagestudio In Maylasia, six informers could earn up to RM50,000 each, but the Business Software Alliance, which asks police forces to raid homes and businesses, is hedging on the payout, saying, "It all depends on the accuracy of their information and the result of the raids. Sometimes their information may have been correct but during the raid, some software may have been deleted." Despite hedging on payouts, the BSA says it definitely netted 4,347 copies of unlicensed software, including AutoCAD 2000 and 2005, with an claimed value of RM5.47 million (US$1.4 million). LMS introduces Virtual.Lab Rev 5 for structural analysis, vehicle ride and handling, interior acoustics simulation, road noise and durability analysis. www.lmsintl.com Bluebeam now offers monthly pay-as-you-go pricing, such as US$15 per seat for unlimited use of Pushbutton Plus. www.bluebeam.com/web03/products/PbPlus-Subscription.asp ABAQUS announces Student Edition v6.5 (US$99) for problems of limited size that do not require user subroutines. www.abaqus.com/student UGS launches Teamcenter 2005 software: "the world's first comprehensive software portfolio to integrate idea management and requirements planning with comprehensive digital product development, digital manufacturing and digital lifecycle management processes." If you can understand what that means, then you may want to go to the head of the class by visiting www.ugs.com Victaulic makes available its complete piping catalog and specifications in AVEVA's 3D PDMS plant design management system. No charge at www.victaulic.com/software Portland Backup LLC offers a 30-day evaluation of its online backup services. www.portlandbackup.us Informative Graphics's (US$295) performs batch conversions between many CAD, raster, and document formats to Autodesk's DWF and IGC's content secure CSF/3DF format. Trial demo at www.net-it.com/download/NetItBatch/Download1.asp Nemetschek North America bundles VectorWorks SPOTLIGHT and ESP Vision for US$3,750 (20% off). SPOTLIGHT is meant for entertainment and lighting-design, while ESP pre-visualizes the entire show. www.nemetschek.net/spotlight/vision And ZiPCAD|Pro is updated with triangulate calculator. Trial version at www.zipcad.com/products.html - - - And these news items were posted during the last week at the Gizmos Grabowski weblog <http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/gizmos/>
Seminars & Conferences EMO exhibition (world's largest machine tool show) is in Hannover, Germany on Sept 14-21. www.emo-hannover.de/homepage_e
Letters to the Editor Re: Porting CAD to Mac "No one remembers that Intergraph ported MicroStation to
the Mac back in the early 1990s. At the time, I was working for
CADD Concepts, and that was one of our products. I never knew anyone
who used a Mac in engineering in the North Carolina region." The editor replies: "Even AutoCAD Release 10 was available on the Mac at one time, 1988. After attending the Big Apple-Autodesk Announcement at an AEC Systems show back then, I find it difficult to take Really Important Announcements seriously anymore." - - - Re: Encryption of Data Files "Am I correct in interpreting the text from Evan as meaning:
'If Bowers wins, we won't see real CAD interoperability between
formats anytime soon'?" The editor replies: "Er, no. Bowers was a case that happened a decade or so ago. It allowed third-parties to reverse-engineer file formats. Interoperability has been a right since IBM lost (gave up?) a case brought by the US government (in the 1960s?), forcing IBM to publish the interface specs so that third parties could design add-ons to IBM's computers, breaking the monopoly. "If the new case fails to confirm that right of interoperability, then customers are locked ito their CAD vendor -- good for the vendor, bad for the customer. I think Mr Yares was being sarcastic in his use of 'any time soon'." - - - Re: RealDWG vs OpenDWG "Being an AutoCAD developer for some years in mid 1990s, and seeing how Autodesk later more or less destroyed small developers, I would say that choosing OpenDWG keeps Autodesk on its toes and takes care that the development into direction of more compatible/useable products stays alive. "Selecting RealDWG and thus possibly killing the OpenDWG Alliance would close the DWG database even further. I am not suggesting that Autodesk would be the bad guy in this competition, but they have got their shareholders to keep satisfied. "Your comments about the compatibility of the DWG and AutoCAD
reminds me of some funny flaws in DXF files: Sometimes AutoCAD was
not able to read back its own files created with the same installation
of the program some 30 seconds earlier. That's called compatibility?"
"I believe a majority of OpenDwg licensees are not third-parties,
but competitors who need access to DWG content. Accordingly, Autodesk
will not license these libraries to competitors."
"One other difference between the OpenDWG and RealDWG agreements
is that under the former you can use their libraries for free, so
long as your software is freeware or kept within your own organization.
For example, an organization could create their own free software
to view and plot DWG files using OpenDWG. If they go the Autodesk
route, they still need to pay Autodesk money (either to buy viewer
software or for a license to use RealDWG)."
"This is flawed thinking [that RealDWG should ship three
months early]. Do you really think everyone in the world is waiting
with checkbooks in hand for Autodesk's next release, and that everyone
updates the minute it is released? I think not. A three-month lag,
in my opinion, is nothing." The editor replies: "Not 'tout le monde', but something like 20% of customers purchase the new release within three months. One of the delays in implementing new releases is waiting for third-parties to catch up in updating their software." - - - The Electronic Paper Trail "I recently went to an AEC/Autodesk seminar [in Australia] on Revit and the paper trail. They spun on about how the consolidation of design and construction industries (like what is happening in engineering industries) would streamline and reduce costs in construction/production of buildings. They had a couple of speakers, marketers, a free mug, etc. "With regard to the paper trail, I believe the real change will occur once electronic paper (in one of its many forms) arrives at the desktop and ultimately the building site. The innovation would occur when a contractor is sent a packet of sheet documents and can upload the sheets to the e-paper, changing from sheet to sheet. "I think the reason that paper usage remains so strong is because it is easier to look at than screens. A sheet of e-paper would be more portable than fistfuls of drawings on sites. A sheet of e-paper and a memory stick... "So, where I am going with this? Autodesk are trying to convince the wrong people, or the wrong part of the market. I think their efforts may be in vain, because people don't really want to change. "When a software firm stops printing documentation and instead delivers only electronic files (PDF, HTML, etc), fundamentally the real issue is a cost shift from the software company to consumer, who ends up printing out the documentation. "The mantra now is to shift drawings from paper to DWF. What Autodesk is trying to tell designers is to consolidate their approach, save money and not print to paper -- just work on the screen or send the files, DWF or PDF. "Builders and designers will always want paper in their
hands to look at the designs, sketches, and markups, so I think
they're pushing that particular barrel uphill. I really think is
that it's a fruitless exercise for Autodesk. In this case, the spin
is how Revit can reduce the paper trail."
Spin Doctor of the Moment "Much of the report's content reflects a consensus, and
the group was able to agree on priorities for future action."
Notable Quotable "TQM [total quality management] is dead in our organization,
and in many others, I have heard -- gone to the long home of any
number of other SMFs (Stupid Management Fads), invented, as far
as I can tell, primarily to make their originators rich, to give
otherwise unoccupied managers something to do, and to hinder their
employees attempts to do their jobs."
Copyright 2005 by upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd. All rights reserved worldwide Article reprint fee US$250.00.
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. |
|
|
|
|