SolidWorks Product Data Sharing
- Connect solidworks to the cloud using enovia technology
- solidworks plm for everyone not just big teams
- sharing content of all types
- sw product data sharing (tool name)- web client and SW add in
- secure workspace in the cloud
- vuuch-like communication also data sharing
- automatic versioning
- chat
- works in task pane
- invite users to join workspace
- users may not have SW, can still see comments and images, see visual representation of assembly structure
- uses 3dlive as a web cad viewer – edrawing like.
- “on-demand scalability”
Is this cool? Yes, it seems like it will be useful for a certain range of work, but certainly not all work. It may be something I would like to use with customers who don’t have CAD.
But here’s the funny thing. Or funny to me, anyway. SolidWorks already has this thing called 3D Instant Website that people already don’t use. It exists now, and does probably 70% of what his new thing does. The big difference here is storage of actual models in the new stuff. Did I mention that no one uses 3DIW, even though you don’t have to pay anything for it if you have SW Professional.
I personally like, or liked 3DIW. But I couldn’t get people to use it. Doing the same thing and then putting your files up there on an unknown server doesn’t sound to me like a big improvement. I’m just curious why if it failed the first time, why they want to call it new and try essentially the same thing again (and possibly charge you extra for it?!?!)
I guess wese Solidworks users is stoopid!
So they stop making improvements to PDM Workgroup, give us longtime WorkGroup users the proverbial finger, and then push this stuff?
Pete
Well its having to install activex’s and viewpoint viewer for the 3DIW. Typically people don’t want to have to install software to view something.
I hope that the viewer in this could allows people to view models without needing a IE specific plugin or similar. And not some java applet either.
I read somewhere that because its in the cloud it can be streamed natively as html to the client. I’m not sure about that.
Either way, if something goes into the cloud for customers to look at etc. offsite hopefully they don’t need to go installing viewers etc.
@Steve Burke
Right, and SolidWorks has such a great track record supporting browsers other than IE…
I think it is a bigger difference that you suggest. It is like trying to hard code HMTL web pages by hand, we all know that there is a reason people move to WordPress (which is what you look to be using). There is much value in have a system to dynamically create items. I equate 3DIW to hand coding, and what it sounds like they are talking about to a new version of a WIKI or some kind of add in that may work hand in hand with **hopefully** several CMS type softwares – or maybe it will be new breed in and of itself.
There is much more value in dynamic content, and the other benefits you get with RSS or subscriptions or even these comment capabilities. Try any of that with 3DIW.
Just look at the difference, there were some that created their own blogs and web pages back in the day. But how much easier is it now, and look at everyone doing it. I think this is a great thing. I didn’t get to attend this year but I almost felt like I had because of all the great content that everyone published.
Wonder what this means for Enterprise PDM? We just bought it and having used some other PDMs (Matrix) this is by far the easiest and best when it comes to file management.
Of course, since everything is gonna be in the cloud…I guess its not an issue, right?
SolidWorks will be charging extra for this cloud business, they just haven’t figured out how much or how often (monthly, annually).
Jeff Ray stated that epdm and other partner apps will continue to be supported. That doesn’t mean epdm will have continued development though. However, when Sw PDM is first released, it will likely lack many essentials features. Also, I’m under the impression that SW is not fully aware of the fact that cloud will not be viable for HUGE portions of the market, such as some military and most FDA and ISO regulated companies.
Locally installed apps will continue to exist for the foreseeable future, which I think means another decade anyway. Local installs will coexist with cloud apps. I don’t think there is a way to avoid this other than abandoning large swaths of the market. It also isn’t clear to me that using the cloud to serve existing customers in a different way can only make money if it is more expensive than the existing method – not a 1:1 replacement, it has to be more expensive. Any talk about it being less expensive is probably counting on customers not buying hardware (although they will still need hardware) and reducing IT expenses (although they will actually require more bandwidth resources).
So yeah, you’re right. It won’t be a complete replacement, and it only opens a new market if it is more expensive (so that it increases sales revenue rather than simply cannibalizing residual income from legacy products).
fcsuper:
Why couldn’t SolidWorks Cloud (I’m speaking of the Monday product, not the sharing over the web thing that this main post is about) simply meet ISO and FDA requirements? I see that as a difficult hurdle, not something to stop them. My company, on the other hand, holds on to ITAR data. So the DOD/First Tier government contractors would immediately balk at the data being sent over the internet.
We do NOT use email to communicate design documents with many of our customers. We only use secured, custom methods for upload. So this would mean that SolidWorks-Cloud (again, not MJL post) would have to be encrypted. This would cause a pretty beefy delay, I assume. Maybe SW has a magic card that the VPN people haven’t figured out yet.
@fcsuper
My company develops and sells a product for Document Control and ISO/FDA Compliance that is delivered to many of our customers in the cloud. VisualVault This has been audited countless times by all the major auditing bodies and is in full compliance with the standards. We have been marketing that product for several years.
I do beleive we need to give SolidWorks some credit here. They are more in touch with the user base then we all think. They have not been doing this project in a vacuum. Just because we have not tested it or heard about it doesn’t mean there haven’t been many numbers of people (under NDA) who has seen this.
I know of at least two people who have seen this already. No that SolidWorks has made this public, they felt free to say they had seen portions of this technology already.
Cheers,
Anna
Here is the link to the second person I have heard of who has seen this technology already. https://forum.solidworks.com/message/141566#141566
I will let the other person that I am aware of reveal themselves if they want. That individual regularly comments here on Matt’s blog and in the SolidWorks forums.
I have no opinion on the cloud, one way or the other at the moment. We will have to wait and see how SolidWorks implements the first generation of the cloud. When we have better information I will make an informed business decision with facts as opposed to guesses from the scant clues that have been revealed so far.
I am certainly not loosing any sleep worrying about SolidWorks pulling the plug on the stand-alone, local install software anytime soon. Like ten to fifteen years.
With that said…..
Our company has been using CAD since 1986, from $50K unix workstations, to custom coded software on pc’s, to AutoCAD, to currently SolidWorks. We have many years of manual drawings in our files from when the company originally started.
We are under no illusion that the same paradigm for software/hardware we have today will be in existence in ten years.
We have been through all the transitions from drafting boards to today’s current technology. When we find that there is a good business reason to shift to a new paradigm we will, with no regrets. Our customers will demand it, just as they have done in the past.
Auer’s customers are all the top names in the tech industry. If they had stood still and not keep reaching for the next big thing or technology breakthrough my company would have been out of business a long time ago. Auer Precision too has morphed with the times and it has been very good for our company.
OK, here is my addition to all the speculating that is going on…..
Personally, I think the cloud is a minor piece to what was shown. I beleive SolidWorks is being re-coded from the ground up. This will allow SW to get rid of all the bloat that I am sure is in a 15 year old code base.
I think there are things SolidWorks would like to do with the software but are limited by the parasolid kernal and what the blackbox of a kernal reveals when it is processing a request. This past week in a focus group at SWW on one of the items I asked about the explanation was, yes we would like to give that to you, but the parasolid kernal will not reveal that info, even though SW knows the information is there. It is all in what the kernal API will allow the code writer to access.
The possiblity of a big increase in performance and reliability is exciting. The possibility of a much higher degree of multi-threading excites me. The possiblity of new capabilities in SolidWorks from using the Catia kernal excites me. I hope that new software code (SolidWorks V6), if being written, makes it to the stand-alone version of SW.
Just my opinion, your mileage may vary….
Cheers,
Anna
My comment number 12 should go with Matt’s other cloud posts. Mixing up posts here that Matt has going.
Sorry about that.
Anna
The most words ever written on any topic at Matt’s blog..
Ok say I’m going to keep the same workstn because I use it for other things than SW.
I’m still going to need to maintain it and keep up with SW and tech issues.
I’m going to have to pay extra for bandwidth to the cloud – I’m guessing but 1gb streamed a day?.
Whatever the utilisation is I’m going to have to keep paying the equivalent of purchase+subs just to support existing SW infrastructure.
I’m also going to pay for the server centres plus the IT support staff to staff it 24/7/364 plus 24/7/364 VAR support = more local VARS doing shifts.
There has to be more than 1 computer at work at the end of the line for each logon and the combined speed must offset the lag time for bidirectional transfer of info else it wouldnt be worth doing. So we are talking say 4 pc in action where there used to be one?
If 10,000 users logon out of 1m user world wide -1% -can they be guaranteed to access 40,000 servers at peak times? Could a municipal body provide extra power for 40,000 servers or would SW need to build say a wind farm specifically to run it. What happens if there is no wind?? LOL.
No one has explained yet how the linear process that hamstrings SW presently can be distributed to several pc say 16 cores. How many cpu can you bring to bear on an extrude or placing a dimension at once? Ok rendering can be farmed but these services exist already without SW setting up their own. Same with analysis.
Surely anyone with a need to do walk throughs of massive chemical plants or aeroplanes isnt going to using mid range CAD so why is this capability a selling point.
How can I run macros and custom API on the cloud?
Is this stuff really relavent to a typical user or a small office and how can it be cheaper?
All this talk makes the cloud sound like a panacea for all CAD ill’s and shortcomings.
Its got buzz, flash and fantasy.
The cloud was *the latest big thing* but I wonder if the fad hasnt already past by the time its got out of development.
If we examine the reliability hypothesis – because it lives on the web you cant download and pre test your work on it to know if it has a major problem or not and you cant go back to a previous sp. You are stuck with whats available until someone determines to change it.
How long will that be? 2, 4 or 6 months? Perhaps you signed in on Weds and it worked and it doesnt on Thursday or you were away a week and you dont know when it broke.
Why is SW on a cloud any less likely to have 2-3000 bugs in it than on your desktop.
If they are continuously adding features as they go by nightly patches and pursuing the same fix rate as the past SW will have 3000 bugs inperpetuity or even be getting worse.
Its actually quite a while since SW crashed on me. I dont think its ever hung. My data is fine and its backed up. I manage the bugs by adopting a late sp.
I’ve had much more trouble with IE hanging and telecom outages than SW.
meh I’m bored again… later
Right now I haven’t seen any Indication that the Desktop version and the Cloud version are compatible . it looks like a one way ticket were the main investment of our subscription payments is going to the later .
..they get 1 day off a year to celebrate Mr Charles birthday..
My first reaction is really two reactions. One Enovia is NOT a cloud based solution so there is a lot of work to be done to make it one. Second this certainly means the current PDM solutions will be shut down.
Under the idea of One DS company it is crystal clear that everything will be based on Enovia V6. The cloud will cover every users needs and requirements, let us not forget the Al Gore developed it for government use. That said ITAR users will most likely be the last to convert… The cloud and a true “WEB service” will deliver great value for ISO and FDA, especially design history requirements or any compliance based requirements. A problem I see with the solution is that it is based on / requires the management of the file. Meaning It needs the file to be checked in for things to work. IMHO the idea of checking in a file is not something users find valuable. In most communication/interaction use cases the file is not required. For example if I am the CAD designer and I need input from the procurement person or the MFG Engineer the need for them to interact with the model is VERY VERY low. And when dealing with my project manager say for things like tracking issues that need to be resolved or tasks that need to be completed or general discussions about the part being designed, or notes about the part there is no need for him/her to see the CAD file.
If we can all agree that improving communication and the interaction between people is the problem, then there is another issue with the proposed solution. Design communication cuts across multiple people and therefore multiple applications and therefore your solution must be capable of working with other installed applications (when has a DS solution ever played nice with others?). For example if I am communicating with the procurement person and their reply is related to the PO in the ERP system then the communication platform should understand this and work within the context of the CAD tool I am using and the ERP tool he is using. The solution CANNOT FORCE me to move all data into it.
When we started Vuuch we had a number of core principles:
1) We should not force the file to be managed within our solution (if the user does or does not want to manage the file then so be it, we should not dictate).
2) We must respect existing data environments, hence our use of plug-ins to attach to existing data versus move or duplicate the data.
3) We must be simple and light and work within the tools people already use.
In our new release (next week or so) you will see massive changes in UI, features and approach. Think Facebook for your parts. Every file you Vuuch enable ends up with a WEB page that represents the file, al la the files Facebook page. This page works just like a real Facebook page in that it tells you everything that is going on for the file (if you are a friend of the part). Oh and all of this information is also available within SolidWorks and now even Outlook.
By going to the page for any of your SolidWorks files you can see:
>> Every email discussion, task and issue that is being worked for the part
>> A notes page (think part specific wiki) to track anything (vendor, material, price or requirements, you decide) you need to track
>> A complete history of what has happened (think real-time design history file without you doing anything)
>> A list of all the people involved inclusive of how they are related to the part
>> A profile of the part that provides a description, access control and explains where the file is stored
>> And something new called “Shout Out” which broadcasts messages to the people involved
In the new release each users decides how to interact with the part specific information:
>> The CAD user could stay in SolidWorks and use the embedded real-time activity list http://www.vuuch.com/media/sw.png
>> The Project Manager may work in Outlook http://www.vuuch.com/media/outlook.png
>> Other team members might use the WEB http://www.vuuch.com/media/part_page.png
Dude,
With what SW has shown, selling Vuuch into SW accounts is going to be difficult. They showed something very like vuuch.
Also, there is no way everybody is going to go to the cloud in the next several years. I’ve heard the 10-15 year number thrown around a few times. Cloud will always be an extra cost option, not the main paradigm. We spent most of the 1990s getting away from centralized computing. Now that the communists are in power, are we going back to that false utopia?
Maybe the subscription deal was more. dunno.
Yeh, the cloud has to be more expensive than a local install. It wouldn’t make business sense otherwise.
Right, we are just asked to accept that distributed computing is faster. They have a business model for charging more, but they don’t have a business model for delivering more value.
I’ll bet they limit that stuff because if you run a macro on the server and crash it, you might lose someone else’s work too.
I think some people – less than half of existing users – will find this useful enough to pay for. But if SW could sell an additional product to almost half of users, they (SW) would find that very compelling.
I think it’s going to be the same software, just installed in a different place
@matt
Not sure I agree. This is not SolidWork that you were looking at. It is Enovia V6 connected to SolidWorks so it will be over messaged, over complicated and under delivered. Also if you read through the comments here you will clearly see people do not want to move the file to the cloud. I would imagine the solution you say will require not only this but that you will need to move any related data/files to the cloud as well.