<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 5 CAD/PLM Conspiracy Theories to Ponder and FEAR.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/</link>
	<description>Rockin&#039; SolidWorks 3D CAD CAM and Engineering Design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:16:50 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Benny Shaviv</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-16583</link>
		<dc:creator>Benny Shaviv</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-16583</guid>
		<description>re: #4 - dont you mean Permanent Lifecycle Mayhem? and why has it been over 20 years and no one has changed it yet?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re: #4 &#8211; dont you mean Permanent Lifecycle Mayhem? and why has it been over 20 years and no one has changed it yet?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Buck</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15502</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Buck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15502</guid>
		<description>Ha! Good one. You should have been there when we cut off write access to all the AutoCAD drawings on the server that had just been imported into TeamCenter. Apocalypse now! I&#039;ve never seen so many grown men cry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha! Good one. You should have been there when we cut off write access to all the AutoCAD drawings on the server that had just been imported into TeamCenter. Apocalypse now! I&#39;ve never seen so many grown men cry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Opinionation</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15470</link>
		<dc:creator>Opinionation</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15470</guid>
		<description>This was my fear the moment I saw &quot;SolidWorks&quot; had changed to &quot;DS SolidWorks.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;SolidWorks resellers have for years been able to leverage the UG-SolidEdge relationship in this very way.  In a competitive situation, they can tell prospects that SolidEdge is UG&#039;s (now Seimens&#039;) way of getting their foot in the door so they can sell you UG (now NX).  UG would use all those words and phrases,  “ease of use”, “collaboration”, “productivity”, and “scalability”.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;SolidWorks has outperformed Solid Edge in sales and performance...so is there any truth to the watering down of SE?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As rumors and/or partial truths and/or complete truths like this circulate about SW, it&#039;s going to hurt them.  I think the only thing that&#039;s kept this from hurting SolidWorks so far is the lack of users that have actually taken the upgrade path from SolidWorks to Catia.  I&#039;m not saying that it hasn&#039;t happened, I&#039;m just saying that it hasn&#039;t happened enough to exhibit a defined pattern of behavior...an M.O. if you will.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If you examine the mainstream 3D CAD landscape, the only big player without a high-end alternative is Inventor.  If SW gets thrown in the same boat with SE, Inventor will come out on top.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The point?  SolidWorks cannot settle or compromise with DS.  Up to this point, SW has been seen as a fully-functional stand-alone CAD solution.  Main-stream, maybe, but able to compete head to head with the likes of NX and Pro/E in an environment that was dominated by the big guys in the past.  As capabilities of SolidWorks has continued to develop, the big guys market has shrunk.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;They&#039;ve been seen as innovators and problem solvers.  If the watering-down rumors are true, they&#039;ll be seen as an entry-level program, and users will opt for the likes of Inventor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was my fear the moment I saw &#8220;SolidWorks&#8221; had changed to &#8220;DS SolidWorks.&#8221;</p>
<p>SolidWorks resellers have for years been able to leverage the UG-SolidEdge relationship in this very way.  In a competitive situation, they can tell prospects that SolidEdge is UG&#39;s (now Seimens&#39;) way of getting their foot in the door so they can sell you UG (now NX).  UG would use all those words and phrases,  “ease of use”, “collaboration”, “productivity”, and “scalability”.  </p>
<p>SolidWorks has outperformed Solid Edge in sales and performance&#8230;so is there any truth to the watering down of SE?</p>
<p>As rumors and/or partial truths and/or complete truths like this circulate about SW, it&#39;s going to hurt them.  I think the only thing that&#39;s kept this from hurting SolidWorks so far is the lack of users that have actually taken the upgrade path from SolidWorks to Catia.  I&#39;m not saying that it hasn&#39;t happened, I&#39;m just saying that it hasn&#39;t happened enough to exhibit a defined pattern of behavior&#8230;an M.O. if you will.</p>
<p>If you examine the mainstream 3D CAD landscape, the only big player without a high-end alternative is Inventor.  If SW gets thrown in the same boat with SE, Inventor will come out on top.</p>
<p>The point?  SolidWorks cannot settle or compromise with DS.  Up to this point, SW has been seen as a fully-functional stand-alone CAD solution.  Main-stream, maybe, but able to compete head to head with the likes of NX and Pro/E in an environment that was dominated by the big guys in the past.  As capabilities of SolidWorks has continued to develop, the big guys market has shrunk.  </p>
<p>They&#39;ve been seen as innovators and problem solvers.  If the watering-down rumors are true, they&#39;ll be seen as an entry-level program, and users will opt for the likes of Inventor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ckeen</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15466</link>
		<dc:creator>ckeen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:34:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15466</guid>
		<description>I can only imagine that previous to TeamCenter launch this conversation doomed engineers/designers everywhere: &lt;a href=&quot;http://dilbert.com/2009-07-01/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://dilbert.com/2009-07-01/&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can only imagine that previous to TeamCenter launch this conversation doomed engineers/designers everywhere: <a href="http://dilbert.com/2009-07-01/" rel="nofollow">http://dilbert.com/2009-07-01/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Buck</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15432</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Buck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15432</guid>
		<description>Hooh-boy. #4 had me rolling on the floor. I&#039;m pretty sure that one is 100% accurate and true. Anyone who&#039;s rolled out TeamCenter would probably agree.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hooh-boy. #4 had me rolling on the floor. I&#39;m pretty sure that one is 100% accurate and true. Anyone who&#39;s rolled out TeamCenter would probably agree.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael P</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15417</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15417</guid>
		<description>Right!  And Michael Jackson is resting comfortably next to Walt Disney - in a massive, nicely-chilled Margarita glass shaped like Liz Taylor&#039;s bosom...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;At a recent SWUG, Mr. Jeff Ray addressed this very topic. He eluded to a healthy cross-pollination of sorts, an exchange of ideas between SolidWorks and Catia developers - to inspire one another towards better software development. Think of it described as a friendly exchange of &quot;show and tell&quot;. Caita folks at times baffled by what SW developers were able to achieve...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Lest anyone get bent outta shape over my quoting him incorrectly, I&#039;m NOT quoting him here. It&#039;s my (paraphrased) understanding of his answer, when asked about Catia features showing-up in future SW releases.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right!  And Michael Jackson is resting comfortably next to Walt Disney &#8211; in a massive, nicely-chilled Margarita glass shaped like Liz Taylor&#39;s bosom&#8230;</p>
<p>At a recent SWUG, Mr. Jeff Ray addressed this very topic. He eluded to a healthy cross-pollination of sorts, an exchange of ideas between SolidWorks and Catia developers &#8211; to inspire one another towards better software development. Think of it described as a friendly exchange of &#8220;show and tell&#8221;. Caita folks at times baffled by what SW developers were able to achieve&#8230;</p>
<p>Lest anyone get bent outta shape over my quoting him incorrectly, I&#39;m NOT quoting him here. It&#39;s my (paraphrased) understanding of his answer, when asked about Catia features showing-up in future SW releases.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 5 CAD/PLM Conspiracy Theories to Ponder and FEAR.</title>
		<link>http://www.solidsmack.com/5-cad-plm-industry-conspiracy-theories/2009-07-08/comment-page-1/#comment-15413</link>
		<dc:creator>5 CAD/PLM Conspiracy Theories to Ponder and FEAR.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidsmack.com/?p=5116#comment-15413</guid>
		<description>[...] Random Feed wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptAnd you thought governments and retirement homes were the only powers fettered with the chains of conspiracy and hidden intrigue. oooohhhhh nooooo. Deep within the bowels of the CAD/PLM system lies long hidden speculation and neatly disguised patterns of cover-ups not seen by us in the trenches of engineering, design and manufacturing. Be warned!! Some of these may be true, some may be totally made up, and some, yes some may even put your life in danger just for looking at it. Carl Bass an [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Random Feed wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptAnd you thought governments and retirement homes were the only powers fettered with the chains of conspiracy and hidden intrigue. oooohhhhh nooooo. Deep within the bowels of the CAD/PLM system lies long hidden speculation and neatly disguised patterns of cover-ups not seen by us in the trenches of engineering, design and manufacturing. Be warned!! Some of these may be true, some may be totally made up, and some, yes some may even put your life in danger just for looking at it. Carl Bass an [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
