The Evolution of 3D CAD and the “Dassault Volume Channel”

The guard is changing. The future of 3D CAD is no longer the purview of a small number of CAD vendors who can tightly control access to 3D CAD technology. Take SolidWorks, for instance. They’ve been on the top of the heap for a while. They’ve had a good run since coming on strong back in 1995 when PTC was arrogantly holding court with Pro/ENGINEER at over $20,000 a seat. They thought they were invincible. The original team at SolidWorks had a great vision, to move 3D parametric CAD to the PC, reduce the price and make it easier to use with a Windows user interface. It worked. PTC is now an also-ran in CAD even though they’ve dropped their prices below that of SolidWorks.

For those who recall, PTC’s reaction to SolidWorks was to disdain it, point out its flaws and shortcomings; Pro/E was demonstrably superior, and it was clearly worth four or five times as much. PTC was all about controlling the customer and deigning to allow them the right to their technology. This wasn’t something just anyone could have, you had to pony up big: big in money for the initial license, big in time – and more money --- for training, and finally even more money for maintenance to get you new versions. Many of us probably also recall the stories of PTC salespeople going over the head of a manager who had refused to buy Pro/E to inform the hapless individual’s boss that his underling obviously didn’t understand the honor that was being conferred.

In the end, it wasn’t a feature battle, but more a battle of competing visions, a war of ideology. PTC was focused on extracting the most money they possibly could. SolidWorks was focused on expanding the market by making 3D available to more users, not necessarily converting users of Pro/ENGINEER to SolidWorks. They were competing against non-consumption, i.e., those who didn’t have 3D CAD.

So it is today with Alibre and SolidWorks. Alibre is all about making 3D CAD accessible to anyone and everyone, and building a business that can do so profitably. Yes, there are some that will retreat into a feature battle, claiming that SolidWorks has this or that feature and Alibre Design doesn’t. Sound familiar? Yes, SolidWorks has some more features than Alibre Design does. Guess what, CATIA has some more features than SolidWorks does. Big deal, think a little bigger. In the words of George Santayana, the Spanish-American philosopher, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Today most of the original SolidWorks team is gone. Their vision, which was laudable, is a thing of the past. A new CEO with marching orders to toe the Dassault line has been installed. Development has moved offshore to India. Dassault now actually refers to SolidWorks as the “Dassault Volume Channel.” This clearly spells out Dassault’s plans for SolidWorks. It’s not the company it used to be.

Alibre is the future of 3D CAD. If you are stuck on this feature or that, you are missing the forest for the trees. Consider what Alibre is well on the way to accomplishing: 3D CAD for everyone, not in words, as in “3D for All” from Dassault, but in reality, as in $1,000 or less for a license of Alibre Design. Aren’t we all better off now with the ubiquity of cell phones and color printers? Note: and soon to be 3D printers – see the 3D Systems announcement or our partnership. Clearly we are, and so will we all be when the barriers erected by the “old school” CAD vendors are removed. The choice is yours: a future characterized as the “Dassault Volume Channel” serving the demands of the Dassault quarterly earnings report, or a future where 3D is as common as a word processor or spreadsheet.

Oh, and I forgot to include Autodesk in the chart above. For them, slot this in somewhere around 1982--->

Comments

[John Burrill]

I always love reading your rants, Greg. I think you've nailed it with the future of CAD and 3D in general.
But you've thrown down the gauntlet and I have to pick it up.
First, while your observations about the business cycle of CAD software and pricing are accurate, you haven't made any statements to indicate how you plan to break the condemning cycle. When Second Life and Sketchup and SmartView say, 'you can design anything for $99,' my bet is you'll go straight to features, install base and scalability to justify your $1K price tag....and if you turn to bashing the retail CAD guys the way PTC bashed SW, I'll remind you of it.
Second, despite, Autodesk, SW, PTC and UGS all trying to extricate themselves from a feature war, let me state from a user-standpoint: features are important. Features-especially in feature-based modelling, accelerate design tasks. That's why the most productive 10% of CAD users utilize more than 80% of the features in the software. So maybe it's worth it to get contour selection and surfacing tools into the package. Now, if you never put 'skins' styles and RSS feeds into your UI, I promise, that will factor in your favor when I make a purchasing decision
And finally, I don't think I've read one article where SW bashed Alibre, spaceclaim or sketchup so you may be getting ahead of yourself there
M2C
John

[Simon]

Interesting subject. Realy we should be thinking about going open source in the CAD world. We should re-think the business model, think Google. Why should I pay even 1K$? Open source would allow everyone to pitch in and constantly improve the product, look at OpenOffice. I am not an expert in Open Source developpment, but know that it would be best from the user's perspective. Enough said.

[Evan Yares]

Regarding Simon's coment: Why is it that people with no experience in open source development are the ones who think it would be so good to go that way?

OpenOffice? It's developed by Sun, on their nickel. There are people "pitching in," but without corporate development, it doesn't fly.

There are already open source CAD programs already out there. Cascade and BRL, among others. Notice how many people are flocking to them?

The problems in the CAD industry go much deeper than mere pricing and functionality.

[Pete Yodis]

Greg,

I enjoy reading your comments on this blog, but I don't know if the lower end is winning out in the market - at least not yet. Look at this report done for the European market. http://www.01consulting.net/02_services_h_research_McadEur07_ES.html

Over the last 4 or 5 years, this report is showing that in Europe the low end remained at capturing 10% of the market. It shows that the High end market is shrinking quite rapidly while the mid range products are growing quite nicely. In your opinion, how far off are we from seeing the same thing happen with the low end and mid range? It certainly doesn't appear to be happening yet in Europe, and I can't think that they are all that different. I think you may be able to say the guard will change, but not yet say the gaurd is changing. I am a SolidWorks user - quite heavily. I pay the increased cost because there are many, many features in SolidWorks that Alibre just doesn't have - yet and quite honestly don't know if it ever will. The extra features in SolidWorks allow me to offer more services to my customers and get business that I would not have otherwise gotten, therfore making the investment in the more expensive option a profitable one for me.

[Simon]

Replying to Evans comment:

First if I openly say that I am not a hard core developper does not mean that I don't know anything about it.

I suppose you have your pre-consieved idea of open source, with good questions. So I don't need to waist energy. This discussion could go on, but I do not have the time for this.

[Jason]

Greg, if you're going to through down this, at least get your facts somewhat straight. Your picture has SolidWorks costing $7000....how is that....its always been $4000 for as long as I remember. And even Catia and ProE are no longer as expensive as the picture makes you think.

You also mentioned that SolidWorks development is outsourced to India and that's not true. Most all core development is done in the US.

And when comparing the market at the time Solidworks was introduced to now, you forgot some important facts. SolidWorks didn't just have a cost advantage. It ran on Windows and it was way easier to use than ProE. Also, there was (and still is to some extent) an untapped supply of 2d Autocad customers out there for whom 3d cad would be appealing. So those factors (Cost, Windows, Ease of use, 2d users) played a lage part in SolidWorks' success.

Alibre really only has a cost advantage.

Still, I hope Alibre does well as competition makes for products for all.

[sonic]

To set the record straight, Milliken is MUCH closer to the correct price for a seat of SolidWorks than Jason is. From Dassault’s 3rd Quarter Earnings call held on October 30, 2007:

“…SolidWorks ASP was 4,619 euros in the third quarter, compared to 4,702 euros in the second quarter.”

Based on an October 30 exchange rate this converts to $6,658 in Q3 and $6,777 in Q2. And that's just the raw software. When you look at Dassault's published Q3 numbers and divide the number of licenses of SW they sold by the revenue they generated (a better measure of what it actually costs to get a license, in my mind), it comes out to almost ** $8,000 **. ($7912 to be exact)

So Milliken might be understating things when he uses the $7,000 figure. It's clearly not anywhere near $4,000.

[sonic]

And oh yeah, using a monkey dressed up as the pope (or santa?) to represent Autodesk is a little much...AND FUNNY AS HELL. I love irreverence.

[WoodWorks]

While the SolidWorks sales staff would like you to believe the $4k price tag, the bottom line "buy-in" purchase price for my quote was $6700, nearer the $7k price tag for their least expensive package.

[Jason]

$4000 plus maintenance $1295 (which is optional) is $5300. The average sale price is higher because of the two bundles above the core which adds extra stuff like Toolbox, Photoworks, etc. The highest bundle adds FEA, Motion, etc. Companies buy these bundles and thus the average is higher.

So Gregs comparison is misleading as he lists Alibre in the chart at $1000. That's the base price for "Alibre Design" with no yearly upgrade fees. Not to mention you would need the $1500 Alibre Pro to be somewhat close to the Solidworks core product at $4000.

Still a heck of deal for Alibre users. It just irks me some when false info is spread from any company. I fear the Greg's Autodesk background and drive to sell Alibre has him going the route of "Slimey Salesman". Unfortunately, that's probably a requirement to compete in this world as people buy into false promises all the time.

[Old MCAD guy]

Jason,

It seems you miss the point. Mr. Milliken's numbers are not wrong, nor are they misleading, and you should be more careful when you impugn someone's integrity. "Slimey Salesman" and "false promises?" Shame on you. You seem to think that if you clog the blog with enough meaningless detail, people will think that you know this information better than the CEO of a company whose BUSINESS it is to know these things. Please.

After reading the posts above, I went to the Dassault web site, and the facts are the facts: it costs about $7k to get into a seat of SolidWorks (AS VERIFIED BY THE COMPANY'S OWN PUBLISHED NUMBERS!), and it costs about $1k to get into Alibre (as published by their CEO), your sophistry notwithstanding. So are we to believe you, or them?

And I'm just an old CAD operator, but I think what Mr. Milliken is trying to say is that he sees an opening for a CAD product like Alibre to turn the industry on its head, like Autodesk did to the mainframe/mini/workstation guys, and like SolidWorks did to Pro/E. Having seen a fair number of CAD companies come and go, I think he's probably right.

[Jason]

Perhaps my comment was a little harsh....but he is posting misleading info. Still..call a SolidWorks var...its $3995 for the core package, $1295 for maint. If you throw in the formal training for around $1000, then you have around $6300. Greg's number ($1000) doesn't include maintenance nor training plus the $1000 is not comparable to Solidworks, you would have to at least get the Alibre Pro license. His comparison is not an apples to apples comparison.

I'm just a cad user myself, and Alibre may have a good chance to stir things up, and I welcome it. Just be straight about it.

[John]

Alibre has been around for years trying to win a piece of the 3D CAD pie.

Low cost has always been their selling point.

Do they innovate, or just excel at low overhead?

How many people actually use it?

How many secondary and post secondary schools teach it?

Converting CAD users from other systems involves much more than low cost. It takes a blend of software capabilities, training, and technical support to be cost justifiable.

Given the burdened cost for a designer or engineer, the software license fee is a very small component.

[Preston]

That's an interesting viewpoint. Did you read Greg's blog where he talks about FUD?

You make the same arguments here that entrenched vendors in any industry will make against a startup with something of value to offer. The price of the software doesn't really matter that much? Huh? I don't know what it is you're selling (not Alibre, for sure), but I can't imagine that's the line you use to close deals. It's all about "market presence" and the implied "safety" (read "engineering manager job security") of choosing the entrenched vendor? Standard entrenched vendor doublespeak. Countless market cycles in many different markets have proven that wrong, my friend.

You sound like a SolidWorks or Inventor reseller. Which is it?

[Steve]

I have to agree with you on this last comment. It sounds like a major goal here is to make 3D CAD more accessible to those users who are relegated to the 2D environment. Like myself, it took exposure to 3D to really see the benefit of moving from 2D to 3D software. I've used Solidworks as well as a few others like CADkey in the past. But that was under licenses provided by a past employer. As a self employed inventor/designer I don't really have the financial resources to spring for a high dollar 3D package. This at least gives me one alternative to using a simple 2D software package from Staples or Officemax. Anything that might bring prices down to a more manageable level sounds good to me.

[Ricky Jordan]

Back out numbers from financial statements all you want, the chart is still wrong. You DO NOT have to invest $7,000 to purchase SolidWorks as Jason has already stated. A quote from any SolidWorks VAR will reveal that this is true.

As far as the new SolidWorks CEO (Jeff Ray) having "marching orders to toe the Dassault line". Where is there proof of this? As a longtime SolidWorks user (over 10 years) I've heard these type of statements ever since Dassault purchased them in 1998 and have NOT seen anything to indicate any of it is true. Statements like this are a common tactic used by most of SolidWorks competitors.

Anyone who even closely follows the development of the software at SolidWorks through the years can tell that they have NOT LET UP in any way. I can't think of a single version that even has a hint of this. Each new version has been packed with new features and refinements that save time and expand their customer’s ability to design products.

I truly appreciate what Alibre is doing in its efforts to expand the use of 3D design to more users. I just think the picture painted of SolidWorks is way off base.

Best Regards,

Ricky Jordan
http://www.rickyjordan.com

[John]

I don't agree with the inference that Alibre is a startup.

The company was founded in 1999. They released Alibre 1.0 in April, 2000.

Why hasn't their adoption rate exceeded SolidWorks?

While I acknowledge that the price of SolidWorks imposes a barrier to some prospective users, it also has provided SolidWorks with the resources to provide capabilities that are simply not found in other low to mid-range products.

[Preston]

So John, taking your last post together with your previous post, it's pretty obvious that you're a SolidWorks reseller. What region are you in? Do you have a blog that I can visit? Why is it that you and the other SolidWorks guys feel like they need to come out here to the Alibre CEO blog and bash Alibre and trumpet the virtues of SolidWorks? Are you that scared of Alibre? Or are you just that small-minded? Kudos to Ricky Jordan for having the integrity to let everyone know who he is.

And addressing the silly argument about how much it costs: if the comparison is made, isn't comparing average prices the most logical thing to do? Since Dassault publishes the average selling price of SolidWorks, that's the one that should be used for comparison purposes. Comparing average prices is an apples-to-apples comparison. If the SolidWorks zealots out there want to use the minimum price, it looks a lot worse for them: $THOUSANDS for SolidWorks, FREE for Alibre.

[John]

Preston,

I believe if you will read my posts in more detail, they contain mostly questions that no one has responded to.

I've tried to stress the point that the licensing fee is a small part of the overall CAD investment.

Please illustrate where I have "bashed" Alibre.

[Preston]

John, I have read all of your posts in detail, and your questions are completely self-serving, trying to imply some sort of weakness in Alibre where the counter-implication is strength for SolidWorks. That, in my mind, is bashing. Granted, you're not directly saying "Alibre sucks," you're using passive aggressive tactics to imply it. Still bashing, no matter how nice you pretend to be. If you're going to hide behind "I'm only asking questions that no one will answer," then maybe you should answer the question about whether you're a SolidWorks reseller. Are you?

[Preston]

John (if that's your real name), not answering my question is maybe even more informative than if you had answered.

If the old guard CAD vendors (yes, this includes SolidWorks), could expand their definition of innovation to include something other than that which happens in the darkened confines of a code writer's cubicle, they might see how truly innovative Alibre is. Innovation doesn't just happen on your computer screen.

I think Milliken's vision is spot on.

[John]

Preston,

SolidWorks innovations are significant (Feature Manager, Smart Mates, eDrawings, Smart Fasteners, etc.).

You might want to search the US Patent Office database for patents that have been awarded to SolidWorks Corporation and Alibre.

Currently, SolidWorks is ahead 10:1.

These patents are not merely what "happens in the darkened confines of a code writer's cubicle" as you put it. They encompass significant improvements in how CAD users perform daily tasks.

It seems your view of innovation is to merely lower the cost of the software license fee.

If a user was 10% more productive using a particular software application the annual ROI would be significant (i.e @$50/hr * 40 hrs * 50 wks, the annual ROI would be $10,000.00).

The "get less for less" vision doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps for a hobbyist.

And yes, my name is John.

[Jordan Clark]

I don't discount the innovation of Solidworks. The patents, the bells, the whistles... whatever. In fact, Overall, I like Solidworks. If I could find a way to underline the word "like", I'd have done so.

That being said, Alibre does everything I need it to do, for less money. The real value of a software package lies not in
the all the nifty features-- although I still get geeked out over features-- but in how well the software works for the individual user, department, or company. For us, Alibre is giving the best value for the money.

[John]

Jordan,

While I am a neophyte with Alibre, the way it handles simple operator errors cause me concern.

For example, if you create a boss extrusion, then place an under constrained hole on one of the faces and edit the boss extrusion so the hole is now floating in space, no errors are generated.

Even when selecting the "status" menu option on the hole shows everything is OK.

I am glad it is working for you, but this lack of error trapping seems dangerous to me.

John

[Preston]

John,

You don't really know what I consider innovative, but it's not confined to software features, as your definitions seem to be. I think SolidWorks is going to look up one day and wonder how this "lesser" product has stolen so many seats from them. Alibre probably LOVES that SolidWorks focuses so much energy on features that guys like me and Jordan won't ever use. Is it innovation if almost no one uses it? Innovation goes way beyond nifty features or price.

Interestingly, as it relates to the original post by Greg related to SolidWorks not being the company they used to be, and your subsequent thoughts on SolidWorks' innovation, check out this post by a SolidWorks developer:

http://www.deelip.com/2007/12/solidworks-2008-woes.html

...and this one from a loyal SolidWorks user:

http://dezignstuff.com/blog/2007/12/05/is-there-a-crisis-in-the-solidworks-community/

Hmmm? Sounds like Greg might be right on the mark.

Also, you have never answered the question about being a SolidWorks dealer. Are you?