upFront.eZine News Archives

The State of portableCAD in 2013

Issue #799

 

 

Each year for three years now, I've spoken to developers at the Bricsys International Conference about the state of CAD in the portable market -- Android tablets, iPhones, and so on. When I first spoke two years ago in Brussels, portableCAD was a brand-new market. While I urged developers to consider entering it, the market was so new that we didn't know the limitations developers would encounter.

A year later, CAD vendors had had about 6-18 months experience writing apps for portable devices, so that when I spoke at the conference in Amsterdam, I was able to describe in detail the drawbacks developers had experienced. In brief, the primary problem is that CAD is hardware intensive, but portable devices don't yet provide the hardware umph needed. It is difficult to cram the operating system, the CAD program, and all the drawing data into 0.5GB or even 2GB of RAM, because on Android and iOS devices there is no such thing as disk paging or the ability to add more working RAM. Similar, users can't just swap in a faster, CAD-friendly graphics board. Writing for iOS is difficult, because of Apple's secrecy (most hardware specs are unknown), while writing for Android is difficult because of device targeting.

The other problem, of course, is that apps sell for free, or nearly free, especially after Apple takes its 30% cut.

At this year's conference in Darmstadt, Germany, I reported that the portable CAD market matured to the point that vendors are now looking for solutions to these rather traditional problems:

• A pricing model
• A distribution model

Meanwhile, the hardware problem slowly resolves itself as the available RAM increases and the GPU attains better specs. Quad-core CPUs running at 1.5GHz or faster are now common, while units with 8 cores and/or speeds of over 2.5GHz are beginning to ship. Worldwide, 70% of phones and tablet are Androids, and Android tablets now have more than half the market. The primary exceptions are Japan and USA, where iOS still holds a lead.

State of CAD on Portable Devices

Autodesk by far offers the largest assortment of apps, with more on iPad/iPhone than on Android. Second largest is IMSI/Design.

There is little competition in the area DWG viewers, because Autodesk's products are free, are good enough, and are written by the originator of the DWG spec. The exception is IMSI/Design, who is determined to make a dent in the portable app world with its TurboViewer and TurboSite series.

In 3D, there is no file standard like DWG in 2D, and so far more viewers are available. Among CAD vendors with no interest in the cloud, several have released apps that link back to their PLM systems -- database viewers, in effect.

Let me summarize the types of apps being offered: most are drawing viewers; very few allow editing, outside of markups. Some are dedicated to proprietary formats; some let you view associated data, such as layers and attributes; some handle 3D models, and so allow view rotation and slicing; and most share drawings with services like email and Dropbox.

Actual Download Statistic and Prices

I mentioned that distribution is a problem. If we read publications like TechCrunch or press releases from Autodesk, then all we only ever hear are numbers that start in the millions. But the Long Tail problem dogs the app world, too. Let's take a look at actual download statistics. These numbers are from Google Store, because Apple store no longer has download stats. (Note that some free apps require an additional payment of some sort to be useful.)

Google Play Store, October 2013:

 

App Name (Vendor)	Downloads	Price
GStarCAD MC Pro (GStarsoft)	100+	$9.99
Map Viewer (Bentley)	100+	Free
TurboViewer X (IMSI/Design)	500+	$6.95
eDrawings (SolidWorks)	1000+	$1.99
Etoolbox Mobile/IntellICAD (CMS/ITC)	1000+	Free
Glovius (Geometric)	1000+	Free
HOOOPS Viewer (Tech Soft 3D)	1000+	Free
Nomad (Nemetschek Vectorworks)	1000+	Free
Revizto Viewer (Vizerra)	1000+	Free
Solid Edge Mobile Viewer (Siemens PLM)	1000+	Free
TurboViewer Pro (IMSI/Design)	1000+	$19.95
BIMx (Graphisoft)	10,000+	Free
FormIt (Autodesk)	10,000+	Free
Glovius Lite (Geometric)	10,000+	Free
GrabCAD (GrabCAD)	10,000+	Free
GStarCAD MC (Gstarsoft)	10,000+	Free
SubDivFormer (ASCON)	10,000+	Free
TFTpad (TFTlabs)	10,000+	Free
Buzzsaw (Autodesk)	50,000+	Free
ForceEffect Motion (Autodesk)	50,000+	Free
Autodesk 360 (Autodesk)	100,000+	Free
Homestyler Interior Design (Autodesk)	100,000+	Free
Inventor Publisher Viewer (Autodesk)	100,000+	Free
TurboViewer (IMSI/Design)	100,000+	Free
3D CAD Models Engineering (CADENAS)	100,000+	Free
AutoCAD 360 nee WS (Autdesk)	5,000,000+	Free
YouTube (Google)	500,000,000+	Free

 

Table 1: Download and pricing for CAD apps running on Android OS in October 2013

(Pricing and download stats may have since changed.)

What we see from Table 1 is that download numbers are tiny (with the exception of AutoCAD 360), and that the price is free, generally. For comparison purposes, I included the number for YouTube. Google reports numbers to the nearest 1xx or 5xx, so when you see 100 downloads, it could be between 100 and 500.

The troubling part is the following rule of thumb: download numbers are 6x larger than usage numbers, generally. Because apps are free to download and try out, it is normal for users to download a half-dozen similar apps, try them out, and pick only one to use. (Heck, I've paid for Android apps, and then abandoned them when a better one came along.) This means that 5 million downloads of AutoCAD 360 might translate into 1 million or fewer users.

I would suggest, however, that in the CAD world, the 6:1 ratio does not apply, because apps are not as interchangeable as in the social media world. There aren't, for instance, a half-dozen apps that view files from Graphisoft; there is just one.

Alternative Pricing Plans

The other thing Table 1 illustrates is the price of apps: free. And so CAD vendors now struggle to find how to pay for the cost of developing apps, a product development process that is not free. Figure 2 shows a sampling of some pricing plans introduced in the last year; it shows the variety of system some CAD vendors are attempting:

Pricing for iOS and/or Android apps, October, 2013:

 

Autodesk	Cost Per Month	Cost Per Year
AutoCAD 360	Free	...
AutoCAD 360 Pro	$4.99	$49.99
AutoCAD 360 Pro Plus	...	$99.99
IMSI/Design	List Price	Special Price
TurboViewer	Free	Free
TurboViewer X	$6.99	$6.99
TurboViewer Pro	$29.99	$19.99
TurboReview	$49.99	$29.99
TurboSite Reader	Free	Free
TurboSite Enterprise	Free	Requires credentials
TurboSite	$999.00	$499.00

 

Table 2: Two kinds of variable pricing plans developed by CAD vendors

(Pricing plans may have changed since October.)

 

Tied to Desktop Software

An alternative to charging for apps is to tie them to the desktop, so that the free program is useless without paying a few hundred or a few thousand dollars for the desktop version. Table 3 shows examples of such pricing.

Linkages for iOS and/or Android apps, October, 2013:

 

Geometric
Glovius	Free, but requires an account on Bable3d: $9 to $19/month
	Or a desktop account: $19 to $39/month
	Or a permanent license of translation software: $199 to $995
Siemens PLM Software
Solid Edge Mobile	Free, but reads only SEV files generated by desktop Solid Edge
Nemetschek Vectorworks
Nomad	Free, but requires annual subscription with desktop Vectorworks
Vizerra
Revizto Viewer	Free, but requires desktop Revizto: $199 to $399

 

Table: 3: Several ways by which CAD vendors tie apps to desktop licences fees

(Pricing plans may have changed since October.)

 

[This paper was first presented at Bricsys International Conference 2013.]

To contact Ralph Grabowski for assistance in strategizing the development of your CAD app for portable devices, write to [email protected]

 

---

 

Paul F. Aubin has his new book out, Renaissance Revit: Creating Classical Architecture with Modern Software and it teaches complex parametric forms using Revit's Family Editor. He tells me, "This hands-on tutorial format book teaches many beginning through advanced family editor skills using the classical orders of architecture as subject matter. Whether you create traditional forms or not, if you want to learn the family editor, this is the book for you." For Revit versions 2012 through 2014: http://paulaubin.com/books/renaissance-revit

In Twitter

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Carl Bass: "We have now built a community of over 150 million consumers who are using our products." -> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1726342-autodesks-ceo-hosts-investor-day-conference-transcript

150 million "consumer space" customers give Autodesk $20M revenue = 13 cents/customer/year. CAD competitors will be sure to avoid this space.

The Autodesk Master Plan: get desktop users onto rental, and then start layering on [charges for] cloud applications. As of 1 Feb 2015 upgrades are canceled.

Autodesk has 1.9 million commercial subscribers.

By FY2018, Autodesk expects 70% of its income to be recurring (cloud, rental and maintenance subscription); currently at 40%.

Fusion 360 has "over 20,000 users," reports Autodesk.

Autodesk's PLM 360 has 10,000 users

CAM 360 will be the first cloud solution for CAM [computer-aided manufacturing] from Autodesk.

- - -

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Graphics board marketshare is roughly 2/3 nVidia, 1/3 AMD, and zero for Matrox and S3 -> http://jonpeddie.com/publications/add-in-board-report/

JPeddie Research reports add-in graphics boards (AMD,nVidia,etc) declined 17% from last year, skidding more than the 8% decline in PC sales.

Horay! nVidia finally admits its GPUs ruined our HP (etc) notebook computers, and is paying out $1.9 million [in Canada] -> http://www.canadiannvidiasettlement.com

- - -

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): "Geeks for Monarchy:The Rise of the Neoreactionaries" It's remarkable the many directions human thought can wander -> http://tcrn.ch/1eod7ld

- - -

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): As soon as we take the vendor's side, we go against the reader. If we go against the reader, then we publications don't deserve to exist.

 

---

Letters to the Editor

"I am having a very difficult time getting to the drawing commands in solidworks. What I mean is this: I have been an AutoCAD 2D draftsman since 1991. I have never been able to grasp the 3D part of autoCAD. So now I need to get a very basic (a more direct method) to getting the regular drawing commands, similar to what I am used to using in AutoCAD 2000.

"The whole 3D thing of populating a database to draw an assembly is a mystery to me. I have these books about Solidworks, but they all take off from the same place: database properties population. I don't get the nomenclature, and the concept of having to set up all of the boxes and switches-- I just want to get started drawing and not have to fool around with the rest of the preliminaries.

"Can you provide guidance to something that will help get me started drawing so I get the jobs that are out there for this product. The customers aren't going to provide the learning curve to allow me to get grounded and productive."
       - F. D.

The editor replies: "I understand your frustration, because 3D modeling is a very different animal from 2D drafting. Must you use Solidworks? The reason I ask is because there are two types of 3D modeling programs:

• direct (SpaceClaim, SketchUp, BricsCAD Platinum, Fusion, etc)
• history-based (SolidWorks, Inventor, Pro/E, etc)

"In the case of history-based, you do have to set things up so that the model is built rationally. Direct modeling is more like 2D drafting, where you can do anything you want at any time. I don't know of books that would help you, but I suggest you search YouTube for videos that might help you get started."

Mr D responds: "The market is flush with design jobs requiring Solidworks, and it seems that if I could somehow surmount the front end of Solidworks I could get to the drawing part that I do professionally.

"I appreciate you telling me the difference between direct 3D and historical 3D. I was not aware that there was such a difference. I will have to shop the prices of some of the direct products to see if i can get working with one of those software packages."

 

Re: Use QuickDim with your CAD software? Auto-Dimensions might sue you

"Great podcast on patents and patent trolls: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/496/when-patents-attack-part-two."
     - Leo Schlosberg
       www.caryconcrete.com

"I have appreciated your information for quite a while now. Keep up the good work!:
     - David Austin

 

"Thank you for your outstanding service. I have read your eZines for many years. Lately, I am shifting to a different way of receiving your news, via Feedly."
      - W.D.

 

"I'm trying to comment on your WorldCAD Access piece on the Dassault's 3DEXPERIENCE, but it appears I have to now register with one of these organizations [like OpenID, Google+, and Typepad). Can you advise me as to which one is the least intrusive and offensive?"
      - P.L.

The editor replies: "My blog was being attacked by comment spam from China, and so I had to turn this on tostop the onslaught. I've turned it off now, so you can try again."

 

 

---

Spin Doctor of the Moment

"We're entering an exciting new era in which everyone will be able to create and print three dimensional objects."
      - Kristina Libby, Microsoft consumer PR
        http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/16/microsoft_joins_3d_printing_bandwagon_with_free_design_tool/

 

---

* 11886

Keymark's Parametric BuildEdge Software for SketchUp

Issue #798

 

Ralph Grabowski speaks with Keymark product manager Aaron Dietzen about the company's BuildEdge PLAN add-on for SketchUp users.

 

Ralph Grabowski: Keymark is a name that might not be familiar to some in the CAD industry. Can you give us some background on your company?
Aaron Dietzen: Keymark is an almost-40-year-old software company that began by writing software to automate load-generation and member design for wood components, like prefabricated trusses and wall panels. A year ago, we sold the wood component design software to Simpson Strong-Tie.

Now Keymark focuses on building design for light-gauge steel buildings and on our BuildEdge line. (See http://www.keymarkenterprises.com.) We are based in Boulder, Colorado.

 

Grabowski: Where did the BuildEdge PLAN software come from?
Dietzen: We began about two years ago with the plan to take the smarts from our Keymark design software and to bring its automation to CAD users. As we looked into the CAD market, we realized that the act of creating a building model is a difficult process, with a long learning curve for most of the available software. Another issue we ran into immediately was that we found CAD software in general doesn't know what it's doing; all it knows about are lines and surfaces.

So, the idea behind BuildEdge is to create models quickly and easily. We boast a five- to ten-minute learning curve for most users. That's our focus for now, but at some point we plan to move towards automating framing, load development, and member sizing.

 

Grabowski: What about AutoCAD and its ObjectARX, or BIM software like Revit? Surely this technology lets the CAD software know about intelligent objects.
Dietzen: We looked at a lot of that stuff. The issue we faced was conforming to someone else's data; we have a lot of our own data from our 40 years experience. BIM [building information modeling] is all over the place. Because everyone has their own concept of BIM, they have their own solution but nobody has a complete solution.

We actually began with Revit's API [application programming interface], and had a hard time with it, because it is limited. It did not provide us with access to some of the data we needed, and it did not offer full access to the UI [user interface].

After releasing a plug-in for Revit that simplified the input of roof geometry, we instead looked at SketchUp. SketchUp has a very open API, but the data that SketchUp is concerned with is very simple: it works only with lines and surfaces. This is a great feature for SketchUp users, who want to draw whatever they want in 3D, but is limiting for anyone who wants to try to use it for BIM.

And so we are working with SketchUp from the ground up, first allowing users to make walls with door and window openings, and roofs and floors -- the basic geometry of a building. We have discussed making some of what we do available in other programs, but for now we are committed to SketchUp. The company is very helpful and easy to work with.

 

Grabowski: Plus, they are located in the same city as you?
Dietzen: They just on the other side of Boulder from us.

 

Grabowski: So, is the BuildEdge software useful at this early stage?
Dietzen: Definitely. I can model a building in a half-hour instead of a day. Because the model is parametric, users can move entities around everything stays connected. This was my greatest frustration with SketchUp: when trying to modify a building model, I had to create groups and layers and work hard to keep pieces separated to make them editable after input. We definably plan to add to BuildEdge.

 

Grabowski: BuildEdge is $29 now; any plans to change the pricing?
Dietzen: Our goal with the low pricing is to get people using it so that we can get feedback. As the product manager, I can only make a software package that people want to use if customers are actually using it! The goal of BuildEdge is to create useable software that gets used. As major functions are added, the price will likely increase.

 

Grabowski: Are you able to tell me about your future plans for BuildEdge?
Dietzen: Sure! We have another release planned for October, where we will be adding a number of functions, such as automatic input of walls, roofs and floors with a single click. While BuildEdge currently just punches holes in walls for doors and windows, with the next release, we will be placing dynamic components, windows that look like windows, and a half-dozen types of doors (such as swing and bi-fold).

BuildEdge is for conceptual modeling: get something on the screen with a minimal number of clicks. And so the primary aim is to reduce 20 clicks to a single click. When the user looks at the 3D model from the side, he still sees the lines that make up the surfaces. The next release cleans up models to hide lines that should be hidden.

We are polling users as much as possible to see what they want but for now a more complete architectural modeling tool. For instance, at our Web site we ask visitors, "What would you like to see next in BuildEdge PLAN?"

 

Grabowski: Is there number of licenses you can give us?
Dietzen: We have two versions. One is a free trial version with limited functions but no time limit; the other is the version we sell. Combining free and sold versions, we have 7,000 users as of August, 2012. That's one year after the initial launch.

 

Grabowski: Who might be the competitors to what you are doing?
Dietzen: There are some, but the advantage we have is that we are a professional software company. We employ user-based design, software testing, and so on to create something solid and easy to use.

There are many plug-ins for SketchUp written by users, and it is wonderful to have the user base making them.

 

Grabowski: Who do you see as the market for BuildEdge?
Dietzen: BuildEdge is for anyone who wants to draw a building or a piece of a building. This ranges from professional architects and home builders to someone who wants to model a shed for the backyard. In fact, some video game designers use BuildEdge to design buildings for inside their games.

We find that professionals are easier to reach, because they are often looking for new software, but we see a real opportunity for highly usable, low price software like ours in the consumer realm, as well.

http://www.buildedge.com

[This article first appeared on CADdigest.com and is reprinted with permission of Tenlinks.com]

 

---

 In Twitter and on the Blog

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Autodesk claiming to be first in doing 3D design in a Web browser. Kinda doubt them, but here's the press release -> http://news.autodesk.com/press-release/architecture-engineering-construction-civil-infrastructure-and-natural-resources/aut-1

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Adesk is using OTOY, the same video-over-Web company that powered the much-discussed SolidWorks V6 demo w-a-y back in 2010.

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Here is OTOY 'splaining technically how Inventor runs in "any" HTML5 browser -> http://www.otoy.com/AWSPressRelease.htm. Will it run on my FirefoxOS fone?

Alex Bausk (@bauskas): It's cool, @autodesk. Surely you are the first to do remote CAD, like, ever.

- - -

Alex Bausk (@bauskas): This just in: 3DEXPERIENCE® from DASSAULT® is currently priced at ALL THE MONEY YOU HAVE®.

Roopinder Tara (@rtara): 'Kids try to adjust the television by swiping the screen,' say Monica Menghini of Dassault on the changing world at #3DXforum

CADdigest (@CADdigest): I didn't know kids still watched tv.

 

---

Letters to the Editor

Re: Use QuickDim with your CAD software? Auto-Dimensions might sue you

"It was interesting to read your comments on Adra. We used Adra (Cadra) software starting it the early 1980s until approximately the mid 1990s primarily because of its compatibility with CADAM, which IBM used at the time. (We were a subcontractor to them). I'd lost track of that company over the years, but will say that it is --
to this day -- the quickest 2D drafting program I've used.

"It was actually 2-1/2D, rather than 2D or 3D because it could project between the three axonometric views. That and other features such as the quick dimensioning that is now the subject of a patent suit and other productive features such as quick cornering (chamfering/trimming) made it very productive."
  - Steve S.

The editor replies: "Sometimes old software is better than today's, because it had to be written more efficiently. Today's software is very sloppy, especially when written with .Net."

- - -

"Wow, what a story! Ancient proverb: Settle a dispute before it begins, or it will be like waters breaking forth (a flood or tsunami). As a person of words, what are your feelings on all this suing?"

     - Cadman777

The editor replies: "I am against it, of course, for only the lawyers benefit. It is worse when lawyers bend the laws to profit for themselves, as with patent trolls setting up shell companies."

Mr Cadman responds: "Pretty sad commentary on the morality of the world, eh? You're one of the few 'people of word' that I know who does constructive things w/your trade."

- - -

"You know, I never got into quick dim. I remember when it came out. Like so many other AutoCAD enhancements, it offered promise to really speed up my drafting. But then in the execution of it, some detail gets left out (like rules regarding what you picked and what AutoCAD would offer to do for you) which made it pretty useless for the typical AEC user like myself. In the AEC world, about 2/3 of our dimensioning picks turned out to be perpendicular osnap points, which Qdim just didn't treat nicely."

   - R. P.

The editor replies: "It seemed to overdimension. DimContinue was just as good! And now QDim will cost some CAD vendors lots of money, even if they win the suits."

- - -

"I loved the write-up on the Auto-Dimensions patent brouhaha. I'm really wondering how legitimate their patent is based on prior published work.

"Back in 1982, I headed up a project at Shape Data (with David Taylor before his Pro/Desktop and SpaceClaim fame) that incorporated toleranced dimensional relationships in the Romulus solid modeler (the precursor to ACIS and Parasolid). The system had the ability to encode these relationships in the solid model itself referencing topological elements and using geometry to perform the dimensional evaluation. It had a sub-system which would then 'automatically' lay out typical engineering views and distribute the dimensions based on the relevant view given the dimension's orientation. This was available in one version of Romulus -- Romluluus v5.2 -- after which it was removed because it was viewwed as non-solid model data (I have to remember the name of the company was/is Shape Data, not Product Data). Yes, this was back in 1982 and until just recently this functionality has been rare in today's modeling systems. Much of what was demonstrated in that system may be prior work to the Auto-Dimensions' patent.

"Keep up the excellent industry overview!"

   - John Callen

The editor replies: "Yah, sometimes it is remarkable what old systems could do, that new systems don't know about. I feel that way about software that ran on my old PalmPilots vesus what's available for today's Android/iPhones."

Mr Callen responds: "Actually, the project was reviewed by Bob Sproull (of Newman & Sproull "Principles of Computer Graphics") and the following conversation occurred:

BSproull, "So, you encode the dimensional relationships in the solid model and evaluate the dimension?"

JCallen, "Yes, that's right."

BSproull, "So, could you also store a value with the dimensional relationship?"

JCallen, "Yes, we could do that."

BSproull, "And could you determine what the difference was between the evaluated value and the stored value?"

JCallen, "Yes, we could do that."

BSproull, "And given that difference, do you think you could figure out how to modify the model to fit?"

JCallen, "Well, yes; Ian Braid is working on this right now."

BSproull, "You realize that you'd have parametric modeling if you did that?"

"Remember, this is 1982, still before PTC came out with Pro/ENGINEER. When this approach was proposed to the directors of Shape Data, they quickly responded with, 'This is not how you interact with solid modelers'. And so, Romulus missed out on parametric modeling and the age of Pro/E's revolution was born. If you survive long enough in this industry, everything old is new again."

- - -

"I found this about BricsCAD 14.1.02: 'The QDIM functionality, which was newly added in V14.1.01, has been removed from this release in view of an unclear patent situation that recently emerged and which Bricsys wants to research prior to possibly incorporating said function again in a future release.' http://www.bricsys.com/common/releasenotes.jsp?i=3357 ."
  - Jimmy Bergmark

    JTB World

 

Re: Eli Attia's patent vs Google-Vannevar

"Back in 2006, I was at a party at Joel Orr's house in Mountain View, and I spent quite a bit of time talking with Eli about some of the concepts that appear to be at the heart of his patent. When it comes to tall buildings Eli knows whereof he speaks. From his bio at Huffington Post: 'As head of his own New York firm, Eli Attia Architects, and earlier as Chief of Design for Philip Johnson, Eli designed several internationally-recognized buildings that have been critically acknowledged as instrumental in redefining the modern skyscraper.'

"They say it's not bragging if you've done it. Eli has done it. In our conversation, I found the way that Eli decomposes the process of creating buildings to be reminiscent of how really good software architects decompose their systems. While his 2009 patent application probably looks, on the surface, like an 'idea and not a method,' you might need to read the eight subsequent patent applications to start to get a sense of what he's really getting at."

  - Evan Yares

   (reprinted from http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2013/10/eli-attia-vs-google-vannevar.html)

 

---

Notable Quotable

"There are three truths of cloud: machines will fail, software has bugs, people will make mistakes."
      - Mike Neil, general manager, Windows Azure, Microsoft
        http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/azure_outage_reveal/

---

 

* 11886

Using QuickDim with your CAD software? Auto-Dimensions might sue you

Issue #797

 

 

Autodesk in March 1999 released AutoCAD 2000, which added the QDim command. Three years earlier, however, a now-defunct CAD company named Adra Systems filed and received patent 5,655,095 for the same dimensioning operation. Here is how Adra described QuickDim:

QuickDim speeds the dimensioning process by automatically deciding whether to insert horizontal, vertical, angular, radial, diameter or parallel dimensions, based on the geometry being dimensioned and the position of the cursor relative to the geometry.

In a 1996 press release announcing the patent win, Adra Systems warned the CAD world:

QuickDim has been a feature of Cadra Design Drafting since version 9.1. The feature was conceived by Adra Application Engineer Rene LoNegro in France and engineered at Adra headquarters. [Vice president of technical marketing Ralph] Mayer explained that Adra is interested in re-licensing the patented technology to other CAD/CAM vendors.

I don't know if licensing ever occurred.

In addition to QuickDim, Adra had a number of other operations prefixed 'Quick' in Cadra, such as Quick-Hatch intelligent cross-hatching, QuickTrim trimming and rounding, and Quick-Pick intelligent library insertion.

(Patents need to cite references, and those of Adra's '095 patent cite a 1993 quick reference book about Pro/Engineer published by OnWord Press, and the 1992 TurboCAD user manual.)

In 1999, Autodesk filed an unrelated patent for a method of acquiring alignment points (probably snap guidelines used in AutoCAD) that cited the '095 patent, meaning the company was aware that the QuickDim technology was patented. Adra is not, however, listed among AutoCAD's 25 pages of copyrights and third-party credits.

The Sad Tale of Adra Systems

Formed in the early 1980s as a lower-cost CAD hardware-software firm, Adra Systems had its ups then its downs in the CAD market. So, to concentrate on its Web-centric PLM software MatrixOne, in 1998 it sold the Cadra CAD software to SofTech. But then, following several years of success in PLM and then increasing losses, Adra in 2006 sold the PLM software to Dassault Systemes, which renamed it Enovia Matrix One

When we read the background, the whole history is sad. Adra's sale of each package came after sales had declined for several years. Some partners, such as PTC, did not renew agreements that linked their CAD software with MatrixOne. SofTech did not keep the aging Cadra competitive against modern CAD systems, and so only lost customers, not gaining new ones. In a hint of what was to come, the company stated in an S1A filing, "Patent litigation and intellectual property litigation are expensive and our resources are limited."

In September 2013, SofTech sold Cadra to Mentor Graphics, an ECAD [electrical design] firm, but continues to sell it own PLM software, ProductCenter 9. The sale to Mentor is due to close at the end of November; I suppose Mentor will use Cadra as a drafting component to counter the likes of SolidWorks and Inventor, who are increasingly encroaching on ECAD territory.

The Tactics of Auto-Dimensions

Auto-Dimensions LLC (no relation to automotive firms of the same name) shares its Texas address with Acacia Research Corporation (http://acaciatechnologies.com), a $180-million a year firm whose tagline reads "Empowering Patent Owners, Rewarding Invention." The firm attempts to collect license fees on patents -- or else it will "resort to intense patent litigation," as its CEO describes it.

Auto-Dimensions LLC was formed on July 22, 2012. The next month, Acacia announced that Auto-Dimensions had acquired patents relating to "computer aided design tools" -- a single sentence with no further details given, which is typical of Acacia press releases. The details became known in December when it launched law suits against Autodesk, SolidWorks Dassault Systemes, and Siemens PLM Software over the QuickDim patent, and included in the suits a number of smaller firms that use the offending software: AutoCAD, SolidWorks, and Solid Edge.

Acacia uses this process:

1. It finds patent owners looking for revenues, and offers to collect on their behalf, at no cost to them. In a few cases, Acacia pays up-front license fees to the patent holder.
2. Acacia forms an LLC (limited liability corporation), and then the LLC acquires the patents.
3. Through the LLC, Acacia starts negotiations with firms apparently violating the patent.
4. Should negotiations fail, the LLC launches its law suit through the patent-holder-friendly Texas courts, stating that the companies did their transgressions in the Eastern District of Texas.

Acacia forms empty LLC subsidiaries to protect itself financially should a law suit fail.

One research firm ranks Acacia as one of the most aggressive NPEs [non-practicing entities, the polite term for patent trolls who sue over patents they own but don't use in their business] -- second only to Intellectual Ventures -- having sued 1,276 parties in five years. It is proudest of some medical technology patents, and of a 4G (cell phone data) patent it feels it can collect on around the world.

In recent quarters, however, Acacia revenues have fallen, because its victims have learned to become more stubborn and so now fight back by dragging out the negotiation stage. In addition, anti-NPE legislation proposed in the US legislature may help weaken the company.

Who's Doing the Suing?

Technology vendors use patents as a form of insurance. Should another company threaten to sue over alleged violations, the tech vendor can threaten to counterattack with its own patent-violation suit. This "insurance" flounders, however, in the case of NPEs, for their shell LCCs have no assets against which to mount a counterattack. Today, for instance, Nokia and Samsung renewed a five-year agreement to not sue each other over patents, because each has a treasure trove to protect them.

Who is Auto-Dimensions representing? In my opinion, I think it might be SofTech? They owned Cadra and its patent at the time the law suit launched. The law suits mention a second QuckDim patent owned by SofTech, patent 5929856, which is an extension of the original. (I asked SofTech about the patents, but did not receive a response.)

The Suits Against Siemens PLM and Dassasult Systems

Auto-Dimensions is suing Siemens PLM, because a 2002 patent 10/104,045 ("Custom drawing symbols") owned by Siemens cites both the '095 and '856 patents. Specifically, Solid Edge is named as violating the patents, but curiously no customers are being sued.

Dassault Systemes is sued, because SolidWorks in 2010 filed a patent (20100201684: "Creating dynamic sets to automatically arrange dimension annotations") that cited the '856 patent. In addition, two East Texas-based customers are being sued. Like with Autodesk, Auto-Dimensions alleges the two CAD vendors knew about the QuickDim patent, but violated it anyhow.

In a Web page comparing QuickDim in Cadra, AutoCAD, and SolidWorks, SofTek appears to show that SketchUp also uses the technology. Google or Trimble have not been sued, however; I don't know if they settled.

Summary: in light of this litigation, CAD vendors whose software implements a QuickDim-like function should consider appropriate actions to take.

Sources

Patents:
http://www.google.ca/patents/US5655095 (QuickDim patent assigned to Adra)
http://www.google.ca/patents/US5929856 (Adra patent assigned to SofTek)

Law suit paperwork:
http://news.priorsmart.com/auto-dimensions-v-autodesk-l7mB/ (Against Autodesk and two customers)
http://news.priorsmart.com/auto-dimensions-v-dassault-systemes-solidworks-l9nr/ (Against Dassault/Solidworks and two customers)
http://news.priorsmart.com/auto-dimensions-v-siemens-product-lifecycle-management-software-l7mD/ (Against Siemens PLM)

SofTek QuickDim videos:
http://www.softech.com/quickdim

SofTech 2011 Financials:
http://www.softech.com/financials/2011112101-S1A-General_form_for_registration_of_securities_under_the_Securities_Act_of_1933.pdf

Acacia 2013 Q3 Financials:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1752852-acacias-ceo-discusses-q3-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript

David Weisberg's history of Adra Systems:
http://www.cadhistory.net/21%20Miscellaneous.pdf

[Credit to Randall Newton for first passing along to me the news of these law suits.]

 

 

---

In Twitter and on the Blog

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): 3D Systems sold only 6,000 consumer-grade printers in the last quarter. Not quite filling up the children's bedrooms of the world

Randall S. Newton (@RSNatWork): Only? I thought 6000 was a pretty good number.

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): There are 116 million households in USA. This makes 6,000 worthy of being adjectived as "only."

- - -

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Q3 smartphone shipments:
Android increases to 81%
iOS falls to 13%
Windows Phone flat at 4%

Robin Capper (@robincapper): Are those mobile ship global or US?

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Global, as in the USA iOS is still supreme. Also, iOS should get a Q4 boost from the new models.

Scott Moyse (@ScottMoyse): Windows phone is 12% in NZ. We're innovative trailblazers down here ;) time to catch up world!

- - -

upFront.eZine (@upFronteZine): Should journalists be impartial? No, for to be effective they must be passionate, and passion comes from being affected.

 

---

Notable Quotable

"Dark matter: 'We have found absolutely NOTHING,' crow physicists. But that too is knowledge, grasshopper."
      - Richard Chirgwin, The Register
        http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/31/dark_matter_still_missing_after_100day_experiment/

---

 

* 118889