Hello! if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the SolidSmack RSS feed or to the free email updates. Thanks for visiting!
You may have seen the news about Dassault’s poor earnings yesterday. Well, as suspected, PTC (Proe/E, MathCAD) is reporting higher earnings. But, that’s not the interesting part. PTC also announced they are acquiring Germany-based CoCreate, another 3D CAD System, for…get this… 250 million. That’s about $2500 per seat CoCreate reports having. not too shabby.
Why would they buy CoCreate?
CoCreate is a history-free modeler. Pro/E, like SolidWorks, is history-based. History-based modelers makes a list of each feature you create with latter features dependent on previous features. History-free modeling is thought to free up the modeling process by taking away those dependencies that otherwise constrain your design. CoCreate has a fair number of seats. This along with the history-free modeling approach gives Pro/E a wider audience. Mechanical CAD definitely seems to be moving toward this history-free approach and I imagine that is why they are taking that direction. A similar history-free product making some waves is SpaceClaim.
What’s Dassault going to do?
I think this is bit of a bigger threat to Dassault than AutoDesk’s threats of combining Inventor and Alias or bringing better surfacing capabilities into SolidWorks. This changes the way modeling is done and the approach that 3D Mechanical CAD has been thought of. Even though AutoDesk is doing one thing and PTC is doing another doesn’t mean Dassault has to follow suit. Whatever Dassualt does, whether it is buying a company like SpaceClaim or souping up SolidWorks surfacing, it seems to me like it would be a history-free, PLM, 3DVia, Microsoft concoction. If Microsoft wasn’t in the mix it would probably be a SketchUp PLM of sorts.
So, whatcha think? Now that PTC has a history-free modeler, what’s Dassault and AutoDesk going to do?
If you haven't already, consider subscribing to SolidSmack so you can easily receive updates when new articles are published or announcements are made.
Co-Create! Yuck! I was unlucky enough to have to use Co-Create when working on projects for H-P (pre Carly, of course). I took a one week training course in 2005 (or was it 2004?) and I was given a temporary seat to use.
I haven’t used it since late 2005, but back then it was a real piece of work. It was totally ass backwards from SolidWorks. What I remember is the huge headache I got everyday during training, the huge amount of mouse clicks it took to do anything, and most amazingly, the fact that BY DEFAULT, Drawings ARE NOT LINKED to their models! It took a half a dozen clicks to link the Drawing to the Model. The User Interface looked like AutoCAD 13.
The last of day of class, the Trainer took me aside. He wasn’t all that happy working for Co-Create and he told me SolidWorks was “killing them”. He asked if I could teach him SolidWorks. I said “sure” but I never heard from him.
Cheers,
Devon
Well, there was one good thing about Co-Create, there were 2 versions, one for Windows and one for UNIX. We used the UNIX version, and that O.S. was sweet.
I remember one guy telling me he had never crashed or lost any data since his machine was new, 3 years ago. He claimed to have never re-booted and to have never turned it off during the past 3 years.
Now, about that secret SolidWorks Apple project…. Let’s see, eDrawings for the iPhone, what’s next? I bet the Woz has an idea!
Devon
I’m down with you Devon. They’re gonna have to give it a major overhaul. It’s probably the most counter-intuitive program I’ve used. If this type of modeling is gonna take off, the modeling needs to be more like SpaceClaim, MoI, or SketchUp. MoI is pretty amazing. I don’t even look for a list of features, structure or layers.
What’s going to be interesting is to see if that type of modeling can make it into the nut and bolt mechanical engineering environment that is use to a history-based approach. SpaceClaim has come the closest to addressing legacy data which is important, but it’s going to be more than just being able to import stuff. There’s library, processes, and modeling methodology that has been developed over the years. Solve that problem or provide a way to ease into it and you could have a winner.
My question is this: what are the major benefits of a non-history based modeler? I’m not trying to pick a fight, I’m just trying to understand what the big hoo-rah is about.
When I think non-history based modeler, I think AutoCAD. In my last job where we used AutoCAD and SolidWorks, AutoCAD had the upper hand when you wanted to “slap things together” and modify geometry. Also, it was nice that each file was independent and didn’t have files that you had to manage like you do with SolidWorks (references to part/drawing/assembly files). However, SolidWorks had the upper hand for 3D, obviously, but also for the parametrics. Also, once you set up a library of parts w/ configurations, creating variations of product lines was pretty efficient and fast. And, it’s easier to go back and tweak items w/out having to re-create the geometry like you do with a non-history based modeler. I remember that one of the biggest complaints that people had with SolidWorks not having inta-version compatibility is that you had to work with “dumb” solids if using an older version. Obviously, there was some perceived value in having an “intelligent” model to work with, with history-based features.
One other thing. What about configurations? Do SpaceClaim, MOI, SketchUp, etc have configurations? I think that was another big advantage and powerful tool that SolidWorks had/has over the competition. HUGE benefit when working with any product “line” that has many variations to it. Which seems to be almost every product out there.
Is there some “silver bullet” that I’m missing that non-history based modeling offers?
Isn’t one of the top dogs at SpaceClaim a “former” Big dog of SolidWorks?
Long story short, SW buys SC.
Kutch
yep, you got it, Michael Payne, but he was also a big dog at Pro/E. So maybe PTC buys up all the history-free modelers? Maybe Mike wants to do with SpaceClaim what was done with Pro/E and SolidWorks? who knows.
I might be naive but I think it is a simple case of PTC buying CoCreate’s customers so they can sell them Windchill/PDMLink and possibly Pro/E.
Bruce,
The big advantage to a non-history based modeler is that you never see “trees of blood” when you make a seemingly simple change early in your feature tree. No feature tree, no cherries!
If you do families of similar designs, if you like to plan ahead when you start a design, then stick with a history based modeler. If you do one offs, if you like to jump quickly into designs and modify them radically, then you might find non-history based modelers are more to your liking.
Jerry Steiger
Well, I just downloaded the free version of SC.
The surroundings seem somewhat familiar.
The commands again, somewhat intuitive.
The results from some commands are surprising.
The lack of history at the left side of screen -a bit disconcerting…
I guess I’m not a free thinker…yet.
Kutch
I agree with Buck, Why go back to Non-History based? If you model correctly, and reference everything the right way, history based modeling is the way to go. I loved moving from ACAD (non history) to Solidworks because of that. Why change back?
Carly became CEO of HP in 1999, and CoCreate’s Modeling has definitely come a long way since then.
I’ve been using CoCreate for many years and am very happy with it. It took them a few years to transition from the old Unix interface to a modern Windows interface, but I find it fast and intuitive, and the 2D is fully linked to the models and has been for a long time. It’s not really fair to compare current tools with much older versions of CoCreate.
Undoubtedly a person’s initial impression will be tinted by past tools they’ve used. Myself and other CoCreate users I know have been far less than satisfied when moving to Solid Edge or SolidWorks.
I worry about CoCreate being picked apart by PTC, but find it somewhat unlikely considering the history that many big accounts have with CoCreate. I am very excited by the concept of a Pro/Create hybrid that gives the best the dynamic modeling and the history-based modeling, as I value various aspects of both styles.
Jerry,
I guess I should have qualified my statement by saying that yes, I think non-history based modeling would be good for concepting.
The more I think about it though, a lot of components (at least at the places I’ve been) don’t every really graduate from concept to set-in-stone production parts; they’re ALWAYS being revised and modified. And the “collaboration” aspect of it, where different departments can provide feedback and make changes, seems to be another area that non-history based would come in handy, but it still seem SOMEWHERE along the lines you will still need the advantages of history based.
Funny, reading the press releases, you’d think this was all about the history free modelling tools. Umm - yeah - might be. What I reckon its about is the pacific rim. PTC’s results in that region are woeful - CoCreate has a huge user base in Japan particularly, we’re talking some high-end machinery manufacturers, typically, printers, copiers etc. and a lot of that revenue comes from maintaining ME10, rather than the 3D modelling tools.
Yes, the history free tools are interesting - but they, as most do, work within very specific geometric and topological limitations - download the OneSpace modelling free edition and read the help files - its all documented and plain to see. and for many users, that’s ideal - because of the types of components they’re developing/editing. If I’m wrong - I’d be happy to hear it.
CoCreate has been hawking itself for sale for years. I had a chat with a pretty high-up exec at PTC last year and asked about someone acquiring CoCreate - his reply? “someone’s got to take one for the team.”
Some of those tools will appear in Pro/E undoubtedly, but they didn’t need to acquire the company solely to get that technology - Siemens/UGS/whatever, did a solid job of matching much of the fundamental in NX 5..
my tuppence..
Al
Al, you’re right on the money. I’m not familiar with CoCreate’s market and was wondering if anyone would bring up points about that. While the tech is attractive, the user-base is even more from a business perspective and CoCreate probably had the right combination of market penetration and modeling technology. It would be interesting to see an overlay map of CAD systems and market sectors.
I think with the emerging markets there’s going to be a lot of potential in turning concept into engineering quickly. If think some of the best competition will materialize as a system that allows an open environment of conceptualization that can quickly make the conversion to engineering and manufacturing data. The tools out there aren’t there yet in my opinion, but if you have the largest user base, you can introduce and build it quickly.
Thanks again Al, great insight.
seen this?
http://www.ugs.com/en_us/about_us/newsroom/press/press_release.cfm?Component=50161&ComponentTemplate=822
Turns out one of CoCreate’s flagship users jumped ship to NX - and I’m told primarily down to the direct modelling tools that UGS/Siemens put into the NX 5 release which pretty much mimics (and in many cases, improves upon) many of the basics of the CoCreate technology.
whoa! dang. Canon. that’s huge. Always makes me wonder about stuff that goes on behind the scenes; the stuff you don’t hear about. That’s gotta sting a little for PTC. They buy Cocreate, Canon says “Run away! run away!” I guess it’s a little quick after PTC’s buy so maybe not because of that, but still, gotta sting. looks like it hit the PMTC share price spike a little too. man. Thanks Al.
i AGREE i USED CoCreate ABOUT 6 YEARS AGO AND IT WAS AWFUL, TILL THE COMPANY SWITHCHED TO PRO/E.
Joe and Bruce,
Different strokes for different folks, or horses for courses as the British say. I liked CoCreate well enough and hated Pro/E. I much prefer SW to either. I have friends and colleagues who would much rather use CoCreate. I have others who wouldn’t be caught dead with anything other than Pro/E. It all comes down to what you are trying to do and how your mind works. The latter is strongly influenced by what you’ve done before.
Jerry