Dave:
Dave Jones wrote:
> thank you for the history lesson. A bit skewed IMO but it was an
> interesting read
I thought that some MicroStation and AutoCAD systems and project level
types would have more to say. Now it occurs to me that the respective
readers may not be out there.
Skewed? Yes. I agree. I don't have all the information that others have.
Here is more text for the rant:
I don't have a lot of dates and names, however, the gist of what I said is
true. There is a great deal to be said by others who have other types of
direct knowledge of events and experience. For example, users [which
to Intergraph and MicroStation is synonymous with customers] of
MicroStation and AutoCAD saw every detail in the programs, and they
saw everything that needed to be fixed, and that was either not fixed
due to resistance or that was happily upgraded. The SW consultants,
dealers, and publishers have totally different things to say. Then there
are probably interesting stories in the realm of intellectual property
and patents. It would be interesting to hear from the marketing and sales
people regarding the history of market approaches and clashes.
Intergraph, even though it isn't a major player today due to its own
marketing and sales policies, was a player in the history of CAD. AutoCAD
benefited by the defaults of Intergraph's marketing policies and
philosophy. Intergraph desired to sell to computers system and CAD
managers virtually to the exclusion of all its CAD workers, who were
its real users, and by doing so they ignored their future. IG should have
courted its workers, and also the students. They didn't. Unless you
were already an employee of a major chemical or engineering firm you
had no chance of learning IGDS or MicroStation. Well...you could have
paid for their training, but to have a trainer come to your offices was
$1,000 per day. They kept their focus on their money trees and ignored
the futures.
Intergraph has, however, wisely built upon its PDS Plant Design System
SW and extended that into the automotive and ****p design worlds.
They are flubbing when it comes to getting major buildings built using
the PDS SW. They somehow think that the big engineering companies and
not future user markets are their future.
Bentley did start a low cost SW sales program to colleges, professors
and students, and that continues. But if you go to the local community
colleges, they only know and teach AutoCAD, Solidworks, Photoshop,
and rarely PE. It isn't that Inventor is not too well known, its that
Solidworks is the main deal.
Intergraph ignored its future in two markets: they didn't want to
integrate typography, raster images, and graphic design into the
IGDS, or MicroStation, CAD SW. Also, they brazenly ignored the
mechanical design world that is now occupied by UGS, PE, Solidworks,
TurboCAD, Vellum, Catia and inventor. Now Alias and Bunkspeed.
Bentley has also stepped out of that arena even though it has a
good basic 3D platform. Intergraph may have defaulted in the
mapping and GIS area, although, there isn't enough information
out in the marketplace to know everything about what they are
doing.
Have Intergraph and Bentley split up? Bentley, the former pirate,
was at one time fifty percent owned by Intergraph. Is that no more?
More is happening elsewhere. PE is poised to expand its product
design and CAM SW, and to consolidate its industrial and facilities
SW programs. My bet is that the architectural market is going to
endorse PE and its modules and build some great buildings using
PE. They'll win more market share than Intergraph. AutoCAD has
structural problems in its SW, and it seems to be trying to build up
BIS. BIS, however, is for building managers and planners, who
work with 3D after the fact of a design being created. Plant design
3D software is the path. There, the 3D SW that also allows designs
to be created, placed into decision trees and evaluated will
probably win. The both the engineers and the conceptual designers
will need their input early on in the design stages, and that is not
where BIM excels. BIM is for recording completed projects.
Advertising? Most boring and uninformative - Intergraph.
Most exciting and mysterious - Bunkspeed. Most silent - Parametric
Technologies. Asleep - MicroStation. Most confusing -
Alias/Maya/AutoCAD/. Right on - TurboCAD.
Beyond the hype and lack of information what is the future of CAD?
|
