design-engine
New member
I remember back in 1993 AOL said it was the internet. When I tried to use it ... AOL... the interface was dumbed down so far that I could not do what I thought to be a simple operation as FTP . But I realized that most moms on AOL did not need to FTP files but my internet was down and that connection was my only option.
SW was created for the bell curve of users. Most dont use Surfacing nor do complex geometry. Most keep the assemblies small... Part count small. So if you design a software for that common denominator and focus on the bulk of the user base... capture that... then mature your software slowly over ten years you get the solidworks we have today.
in AOL FTP is probably still layered deep and it's difficult to use.... someone said, " but the interface is so simple". Most people still have no need for FTP and those that do probably would not have an AOL account. And look... it does have a slip connect to the internet now. But that did not happen till 1995. And now SW has a serious surfacing software. Still the only persons who can argue for or against that tool are the users. And if you had a choice you would use the tool you are most comfortable with or could charge the most.
Once you get the subtle differences of SW it ain't so different. The general form it takes me an hour to create in pro/E still takes me longer in SW.... maybe I make more money in SW because it takes longer.
I think the SW folks were smart and saw a hole in the market. The sized the day and matured to what it is today.
The 2007 version is the first serious push for a tool i could seriously use. Although I am spoiled with TOP down design in Pro/E advanced assembly... sw users really have no idea what they are missing until they themselves become advanced users on Pro/ENGINEER.
For me I just like helping people and it seams those sw users figured out that they don't need training ... the sill sales guys have convinced managers that training is not necessary with SW. Maybe this is the one kick in the paints for us on Pro/E and why we like to tease SW so much. Their user base is more on the weak side and they don't even know it.
I wish SW had more advanced modules and those SW users would take training.
I wish PTC would stop looking at little sister and focus on other more advent guard software tools beyond their immediate competition like Alias Studio.
For my talk at the 2008 international conference I am going to explain what it takes to be a software tool at GM and hopefully some of the PTC programmers take head so we can mature the PTC platform into being even more of the killer app we did not know we need until we learn how to wield it. To do this i will compare Alias studio ability to convert the math of a curve upwards from a y=x^3 to y=x^7 and back. Back and forth control and the further ability to be able to control the internal CV's of the curve and surface at the curvature level.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wield
Edited by: design-engine
SW was created for the bell curve of users. Most dont use Surfacing nor do complex geometry. Most keep the assemblies small... Part count small. So if you design a software for that common denominator and focus on the bulk of the user base... capture that... then mature your software slowly over ten years you get the solidworks we have today.
in AOL FTP is probably still layered deep and it's difficult to use.... someone said, " but the interface is so simple". Most people still have no need for FTP and those that do probably would not have an AOL account. And look... it does have a slip connect to the internet now. But that did not happen till 1995. And now SW has a serious surfacing software. Still the only persons who can argue for or against that tool are the users. And if you had a choice you would use the tool you are most comfortable with or could charge the most.
Once you get the subtle differences of SW it ain't so different. The general form it takes me an hour to create in pro/E still takes me longer in SW.... maybe I make more money in SW because it takes longer.
I think the SW folks were smart and saw a hole in the market. The sized the day and matured to what it is today. The 2007 version is the first serious push for a tool i could seriously use. Although I am spoiled with TOP down design in Pro/E advanced assembly... sw users really have no idea what they are missing until they themselves become advanced users on Pro/ENGINEER.
For me I just like helping people and it seams those sw users figured out that they don't need training ... the sill sales guys have convinced managers that training is not necessary with SW. Maybe this is the one kick in the paints for us on Pro/E and why we like to tease SW so much. Their user base is more on the weak side and they don't even know it.
I wish SW had more advanced modules and those SW users would take training.
I wish PTC would stop looking at little sister and focus on other more advent guard software tools beyond their immediate competition like Alias Studio.
For my talk at the 2008 international conference I am going to explain what it takes to be a software tool at GM and hopefully some of the PTC programmers take head so we can mature the PTC platform into being even more of the killer app we did not know we need until we learn how to wield it. To do this i will compare Alias studio ability to convert the math of a curve upwards from a y=x^3 to y=x^7 and back. Back and forth control and the further ability to be able to control the internal CV's of the curve and surface at the curvature level.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wield
Edited by: design-engine