NOVEDGE blog

Interview with Andrea Carignano, seac02 CEO

Italy is a country famous for several reasons. Among them: artistic and historical monuments, great food, fashion, music, and sport cars. Software and technology are seldom added to the list. So when you happen to meet the CEO of a successful Italian software company, the first reaction is always some sort of surprise: "Software?" If the CEO in front of your is Andrea Carignano, and the company is seac02, the initial surprise quickly disappears replaced by excitement for the type of products seac02 is creating and for the passion and competence Andrea brings to the company. seac02 is radically changing the way we think about rendering. No more static pictures, instead seac02 provides fast (real-time), interactive rendering, and augmented reality. Designers do not have to simulate an environment around their products, they can simply place their products in a real world scene. All they need is a webcam, a laptop, a LinceoVR license, and a 3D (virtual) model of their new object. Here Andrea shares with us what he is doing and how it will affect the way we work.

Andrea can you tell us a bit about yourself and your company?

As you know I am from Italy, the country of design. I have a PhD in Aerospace Engineering, and I spent the first years of my career in an international industrial design company. That company at that time, it was late 90’s, was one of the first to use virtual reality hardware and software, and I was in charge of R&D. In 2003 I left the company and founded seac02, with the goal of creating new tools for design, marketing and sales, to be used by mass markets, in one word [I aimed for] Virtual and augmented reality for anyone, easy to use, perfect quality, low prices.
Seac02 is a private company located in Italy, we started some years ago with a seed investing, and now, actually we have about 50 resellers and VAR in the world and several hundreds of users of our software.

Real Time rendering is a new technology that is becoming very popular. What are the limitations and benefits compared to more traditional rendering technologies?

Yes it is true, real-time rendering is becoming very popular. I see several benefits, but for sure 2 of them are really important: one is time, the second is focus. To use real-time render technology anyone can create images of 3D models at the quality needed for most of the uses, and to have good quality real-time render is commonly easier than with unbiased renderer. Real-time renderers usually are the companion of raytracers, not competitors.
The second benefit is focus. The designer or marketing manager keeps his focus on the product, seeing real-time modification on materials, different viewpoints, anything takes no time, and anything can be modified with few clicks. The limitations are slightly lower rendering quality, and less option for hi-professional users.

With Real Time raytracing seac02 is pushing the limits even further. How is this going to affect the end-users?

Right now it's a must to have real-time raytracing. My personal opinion is that only some markets can take advantage of complex raytracing systems. In fact, raytracing is really helpful for gems, glasses, or any material with reflection and refractions, where most of design objects uses others materials and the differences between render or raytracing is almost imperceptible. As we need to satisfy our customers in jewelry markets, we added a good real-time raytracing feature, GPU based, quite fast and really accurate.

Can you describe the typical LinceoVR user? Is he or she be working in the design or in the marketing department?

We have both designers and marketing managers, the needs that join them together are collaboration and product placement, which are the real distinctive features of LinceoVR. Starting from the assumption that there are a lot of good real-time renderers and LinceoVR is one of them, our users usually were searching for a solution that allowed them to see the product in the real environment very fast, and eventually to be able to modify his aspect in real-time. LinceoVR has real-time camera matching to place virtual objects in the real world; and to please users who were looking for a designer driven collaborative tool, LinceoVR has its own free viewer to allow anyone to share models with anyone else as simple as creating a PDF file. Our typical marketing manager user sends new product prototype to international traders. It is a completely different user experience to receive interactive 3D model that can be placed in the real word using a simple webcam instead of the usual set of plain images.

The tracking technology that comes with your products is very impressive. Can you help our readers to understand what it is and why it's important?

The tracking technology allows the user to place the virtual prototype in the real world. What is needed is a camera/webcam, a tracker (one image printed on the paper) defined by the designer, and the 3D model. When the camera shoots the real world and detects the tracker, the user sees the virtual object in the right size and perspective. The user can freely move the camera or the tracker, and the object will be moved consequently.
Augmented reality is a new way to think design. We help designers create objects and define them while they are in the real world. The designer has every single second the feelings of how the real object will look in the physical world. Any modification to materials is allowed.

LinceoVR has a special edition that addresses Rhino users. How does this version work with Rhino and what does it bring to the crowded ecosystem of the Rhino plug-ins?

LinceoVR for Rhino is the entry level version of LinceoVR. It's a full featured version of LinceoVR, with very few limitations to output resolution. It is a standalone software, not a plugin, and we also provide a free toolbar to export models from Rhino to LinceoVR with a single click. LinceoVR opens directly .3dm files and is updated to the latest release of Rhino.

seac02 is lowering the threshold between 3D models and the web. Are we going to see and use more 3D on our browsers or simply more and better pictures?

Yes, we are going to release very soon a new web platform, it will be called Eligo web. The platform is based on a exporter for the web (optional) in LinceoVR, and a free plugin for all the browsers in the market. The new web viewer has all the rendering features of LinceoVR, and allows one to redesign the e-commerce experience, we call it e2-commerce (experiential e-commerce). It is the first plugin in the market that does Augmented reality and virtual reality real-time in a browser.
Users can configure the product, interact with it and then experience it in the world.  For example a lamp on your desk that can be moved real-time and modified in terms of materials, and colors, based on the commercial option available. Export is easy as saving a 3D PDF, and publish online the same.

I would like to thank Andrea for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Andrea or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

LinceoVR and Augmented Reality seac02 products are available from Novedge

John Helm Reviews Vectorworks 2010

I'm proud to host on the Novedge blog a product review of Vectorworks 2010 written by John Helm of Helm & Melacini Architects. John is an architect who splits his professional time between the warm beaches of Southern California and the beautiful mountains of Northern Italy. John does a great job  going through the new features and describing his user experience. If you are interested in or simply curious about Vectorworks and you want to meet other Vectorworks enthusiasts, my personal recommendation is to join the new VectorWorking online community dedicated to everything related to Vectorworks.

Franco Folini

Choosing a CAD Program

My first thought on writing a review of an update to an existing CAD program is that the readers of the review won’t just be those already dedicated to the program and wanting to know if the upgrade is worth the expense and time to learn new features, but they might also be those looking to change programs or even those architects and others just starting out in their use of CAD. So I’ll first address some issues regarding the choice of which program or programs one might use. I’m also limiting most of my comments to the use of a program by an architect because that’s what I am and it’s what I know.

My approach to the use of the computer is that it should be a tool that makes ones work easier and allows one to be more productive and more creative. An Architect should be able to focus his or her attention on the business of being an architect and as not have to spend months or even weeks to learn to use a new tool. I also believe that in an office there should not be a huge separation between those who know how to use the most important tools in the office, for example the CAD program, and those who don’t.

This brings me to what I consider the most important factors in choosing a CAD program. That is that the program should be easy to learn, intuitive, and available to everyone working on any particular project. It should be available and easy enough to use that the principals, who don’t have a lot of time to spend getting competent on a CAD program, as well as the drafters are able to learn it and use it. And in short it brings me to why I selected a program like Vectorworks some 15 years ago. I can’t really comment on other programs which may or may not do the same things as Vectorworks because I only have second hand information on them and only a limited use of the most popular program Autocad. I should also mention that in order to fit the above criteria one should not have to use several programs to accomplish the goal of producing a drawing or drawing set containing 2D, 3D, text and pictures. That increases the time to learn, adds too many layers of complexity and creates inefficiency in the office.

Here is where we get to my choice of Vectorworks (VW). From the standpoint of graphics it can be a one stop shop, for an architectural office. It’s a design tool, a production tool and a rendering tool that can also be used for most of the graphic layouts an architect might need. The learning curve is short and the way of working with it is from my experience the way architects work.

VW is a complex program and to take advantage of its many features does take some time. But if one is at all competent in using a computer, familiar with Mac or PC graphics programs, word processing, etc. one will find many of the same commands, and procedures. So it presents a familiar face in a way. Starting out just using the basics is simple enough and gives one a feeling of confidence that moving beyond the basics can’t be that hard.

Rendered Site Plans

Design can be done all in 3D and those 3D drawings will be or can be the same drawings that become the 2D drawings making up the production drawing set. Client presentations can be rendered printouts, animations, walk throughs, or even real time views of a 3D model taken on one’s laptop to a client meeting. And if one needs to do a graphic presentation, a competition board for example, pictures, text, 2D and 3D drawings can all composed and printed right in the program.

Create almost anything

In other words, why burden yourself and your office with half a dozen programs when one will do it all. Yes there are other programs that will do some of the individual parts as well or better, but VW can compete with most of them and the results are more than adequate for the majority of what we do as architects.

Complex Models

I’ll talk for a minute about how VW works. Initially we set up a project file entering basic information about floor heights, wall heights, roof etc. Then we set up basic project parameters, dimension style, meters or feet, things like that and then from a drop menu we select the various sheets of drawings needed. That would be for example floor plans, site plans, elevations and so on. We don’t have to do this in any order and they can be changed later. But by doing this the program does a lot of the work of preparing the drawing set for us. We draw on design layers, we put things like electrical outlets, and windows in classes that can be turned on or off as needed. We use the layers as overlays to create various drawings. Drawings are then transferred though viewports to sheets for the final composition of sheets of drawings to be printed. All of this is done in one file which saves a lot of confusion and makes things simpler. If more than one person needs to work on a drawing set, this can be done through the use of references to other drawings called referenced viewports. When drawing a building plan we draw walls, not just lines, that have characteristics such as height, thickness, and finishes, which means that as we draw the 2D plan we are at the same time creating a 3D model. I can go on here but this isn’t an instruction manual it’s just a brief idea of how the program works.

Finally one thing I always hear is, well we had to choose the program our consultants use or that everyone else uses. To this I say who’s in charge here, the architect or the consultants. And do you really want to burden yourself with an inefficient program just because most everyone else is using it. Why not get a step ahead and increase your bottom line with greater efficiency. And of course you can also convert your VW drawings to a format useable by your consultants so it’s not such a big issue anyway.

Paste up Graphics

Construction docs with plans, elevations and renderings

Note that the renderings and plans show above were all done in our office using various previous versions of VW.

Vectorworks 2010, the Latest Version

Before moving on to the details of the latest version we might discuss the reasons why one would want to upgrade from previous versions. I’ve already recommended VW as a good choice or even the best choice, so if you are not already into CAD the choice is easy; buy the latest version. But if you’ve been using the program for a while then of course there ought to be good reasons to spend the money to upgrade. From a purely economic standpoint I think there are two factors to consider. Will the new version save you time, meaning money, and do you have enough cash flow during the current slow down to justify the extra expense. Only you can answer the later question except that you may justify the expense by considering the time to learn new features and the fact that if work is slow you have the time to do it. For the first factor I will discuss some features that are in the new version that I believe will more than justify the purchase by time saved. It’s interesting to note that some of the most significant time savers are perhaps the least note worthy in terms of technical development or progress.

As an example of what may be a simple change (not being a programmer I admit I don’t know how simple this was technically) is the ability to change the origin, the rotation and scale of a hatch. On a recent plaza project in Italy we had a variety of hatches all at various angles and scales. We also needed to use the hatches in the detail drawings. And the project underwent numerous changes in the pattern layouts. As a result hatches were not associated; every hatch had to be redone for each area and each change which was a several step process requiring significant time. Most of this time will be saved in the new version. But I am disappointed that they haven’t made a way to make hatches three dimensional. This would be very useful since as it is now one must copy the area hatched and then add a texture to make it show up in a 3D rendering.

Once you get used to using the dimension constraint manager it can save time and also potential mistakes. Walls can be moved and their dimensions update automatically. You can also change the dimension and the wall itself moves, while at the same time the other dimensions in a string of dimensions also changes, as does the overall dimension. One overall dimension changed and not forgotten as often happens when doing it manually might be worth the cost of the upgrade by itself. You can also lock a dimension and its associated walls so that it can not be easily changed. This would be very useful for those areas like hallways where minimum dimensions must be maintained. Also one can save time in layout and design when starting a new project. Walls can be placed in their approximate location and easily adjusted later, with adjacent walls updating automatically.

I think another big time saver will be the unified view tool which replaces the old stacked layers tool. If you do a lot of 3D modeling then this is big. Basically a unified view can be a model of the complete project. From this view one can access any layer, and modify objects while in a 3D view. There is no need to constantly switch back and forth from a model view to a design layer to elevations views etc. It can all be done within a single unified view just switching between 3D, plan and elevations views.

In place reference editing can be a time saver but it depends a lot on how one uses the program. It does not allow one to change referenced drawing files it only works on referenced resources. I think this might be a big help in coordinating drawings on a large project and also on say an apartment project one might turn individual apartment plans into symbols which could be referenced from a master file and changed as needed.

There are several other features which when added together will allow additional time savings. In viewport crops one can now see the entire drawing so there is no more guessing about where to put the crop lines. I like the find resource capability, as I seem to spend lots of time finding symbols and other resources that seem to get placed most anywhere. There is a new connect combine tool for multiple objects. The automatic coordination of sheet numbers seems pretty cool. Sheet numbers are coordinated with drawing numbers and updated automatically if changed in one instance.

So my answer to the first question of economics is a pretty strong, it’s worth it. Now what about some of the other changes and new or revised features?

Here I see a lot of good stuff. And I don’t see anything changed for the worse, (a very important feature) but I do find some of the changes or new features somewhat of a work in progress. For example file referencing has been updated. From my testing of this feature, I see that it works pretty well in 2D but in 3D it seems unpredictable. I tried to reference a floor plan onto a site plan in one case in the same file so it could be rotated. It showed up fine in a 2D view but when I switched to a 3D view the referenced floor plan disappeared. Another interesting thing is that when I referenced the same floor plan to the site plan in another file the same thing happened but also curiously when I turned off unified view and set it to active layer only, then changed to an isometric view, the dimension text showed up on the 3D view. That is a good feature but one that is not supposed to happen. I suspect that part of the problems I’ve had here are due to a lack of computing power, graphic card issues or not enough ram to handle larger complex models. I have seen it work fine on a much simpler model than the one I made. I see the new planar graphics feature as a work in progress as well. It would be much more useful if one could also project text and dimension callouts in 3D. But the ability to see a 2D site plan for example with a 3D model placed on it is very useful. The active layer plane and screen plane views will take some getting used to and I’m guessing a bit of swearing. The good news is that items made in one can be changed to the other with one mouse click. This is one place where the new “magic wand” or select similar tool can be very useful. You select the parameters from a list then click on one instance and all similar items are automatically selected. The problem I have had with this is that I could not get it to select dimensions. I had to revert to the old custom selection tool. It may just be that I don’t know how to use it properly or that it’s not intuitive enough – isn’t that a great excuse for not knowing how to do something.

The wall sculpting tool is useful. I was more excited about it before I tried it. But I still like it. I thought one could stretch the sides of a wall to, for example, fit it to some of the old odd shaped walls one finds in remodels. That can be done but one has to build a 3D object and then combine it with the wall rather than change the wall itself. The result is the same. So far the new stair tool seems great. One has many more options as to how the stair will be constructed. But on my first try, making a spiral stair it placed the railing across the upper end of the stair. I haven’t yet figured out how to remove it, but there must be a way. Corner windows are a nice little feature that I have wanted many times. Cutting holes in walls has gotten much easier.

One thing that I think we worry about is how well our old drawing files will convert when opened in the latest version. So far I can see no problem here. I have opened up some fairly complicated version 2008 files without any problems. In fact I was pleased to see some tree symbols updated and looking much more photo like. There also seems to be a decent increase in rendering speed.

Renderworks is one of the most important aspects of the program at least in the way I use it. There have not been a lot of changes but the ones that have been made are important. They have improved texture mapping and one can put one or more textures on top of each other to create labeling, signage and layered material effects.

Finally I think it’s important to address the issue of being able to transfer files to consultants and clients who need them in a format usable by Autocad. So the question is does this upgrade make that easier. The answer is a qualified yes. One can batch export several sheet layers as individual files which when viewed in Autocad present themselves as formatted sheets that I believe could be printed easily. The problem is that all the VW layers are stacked on top of each other so sorting them out for the Autocad drafter could be difficult. The other option is to export VW saved views. This seems to be a practical option if one needs to send say a floor plan to a consultant. The resulting dwg file looks pretty clean.

There are many other changes and additions that can best be reviewed by looking at the list on the VW website. For example working planes are much easier to access, 3D snapping is improved and so it’s easier to select, modify and align objects in 3D.

Overall this is very much a useful and worthwhile upgrade. There are enough time saving features to justify the cost. And the other improvements will just make one’s working life more pleasant. That is of course after one learns to use them and gets over habits and work around’s used in past versions.

If you are considering updating or purchasing Vectorworks I would suggest having a look at the videos on the Vectorworks website, http://www.nemetschek.net/library/index.php Jonathan Pickup’s website http://www.archoncad.co.nz and his videos on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/archoncad and you can have a look at many 3D models I’ve created on my website www.hm-architects.com.

Finally here is a bit of a disclaimer. I have tried to write an honest appraisal, but I will admit to wishing there were more users of the program I use in my practice because that would make it easier to work with consultants and to find employees who are already trained in using it.

If you have any questions please leave a comment below and I will be glad to answer.

John Helm

Interview with Alex Antich, TechJewel CEO

Rhino is a very flexible application and is gradually penetrating different professional areas, from industrial design, to architecture, and jewelry design. Each specific area can greatly benefit from Rhino's features but requires specific commands and libraries that are usually not provided by Robert McNeel and Associates. What McNeel provides is a powerful software platform on top of which third parties such as TechJewel, can build vertical plug-ins. One of the most successful plug-ins is RhinoJewel, formerly known as TechGems. This is a product that has evolved over the years to provide a complete set of commands, templates and features to jewelry designers. I interviewed the founder and CEO of the company, Alex Antich, to find out more about the very interesting world of Rhino plug-ins.

Alex can you tell us a bit about yourself and your company?

Jewelry came natural to me as my father was a goldsmith with a jewelry store and workshops

Hello Franco, and thanks for the interview. I was born into a family of jewelers and ever since I was a boy I have had two great passions: jewelry and technology.
Jewelry came natural to me as my father was a goldsmith with a jewelry store and workshops in one of the main shopping streets of Barcelona. At a young age I started a long apprenticeship as a goldsmith - first with my father and later for a number of the leading jewelry manufacturers in Spain. I graduated from jewelry school in 1991 and studied gemology at the University of Barcelona.
My passion for computers and technology dates back to the early 80s when home PCs became increasingly common. From the moment I laid eyes on my first computer I started thinking how we could use this technology to design and manufacture jewelry. I developed the first gem libraries for 3D software in 1994 and founded my current company Techjewel in 1999 as a training center and consultancy for new technologies applied to jewelry design and manufacturing. In 2000 Techjewel launched TechGems, a jewelry design plug-in for Rhino which evolved throughout the years and in its current version is called Rhinojewel 5.0. Techjewel also runs a training facility for 3D jewelry design using Rhinojewel and a Solidscape service bureau called Protojewel.

Can you explain the main reasons your customers like to extend their Rhino with a plug-in such as RhinoJewel?

RhinoJewel adds to Rhino a comprehensive set of jewelry-specific tools

Rhino is a fantastic CAD software which is in many ways very complete. The art of jewelry making however requires specialist knowledge which cannot be improvised and mastery of ancient techniques that have developed over centuries and have only recently (last 15-20 years) started to converge with the so called CAD-CAM revolution. RhinoJewel adds to Rhino a comprehensive set of jewelry-specific tools, focused on real-life applications and developed by a team of jewelry professionals with a proven track record working or consulting for the leading jewelry houses in the world. While there are numerous Rhino tools which are just perfect to design jewelry the way they are, many jewelry techniques and design strategies require customized tools which can significantly speed up and simplify the modeling process. Rhinojewel offers not only parametric jewelry builders but most importantly specific tools developed for the needs of jewelry professionals that empower creativity. Every Rhinojewel tool is a synthesis of proven jewelry techniques with the latest CAD-CAM technologies available.

What are the reasons for the growing success of Rhino and Rhino's plug-ins in the jewelry design industry?

the McNeel & Associates business culture which has always been open to collaboration

Rhino is at the same time extremely powerful, flexible, precise and very well priced. It is also continuously evolving and interfacing with the most exciting innovations in this field. It has proven itself the ideal CAD engine on which to build sector-specific plug-ins like RhinoJewel. Even at a worldwide level, the jewelry industry is a closely knit community and the great majority of users ends up using what works best. Beyond its technical superiority, part of Rhino's success is also owed to the McNeel & Associates business culture which has always been open to collaboration with professionals from a wide range of industries for the development of specialist plugins.

T-Splines gets a lot of attention from jewelry designers. Does this signal a limitation of the current technology, or a mature market able to explore new solutions?

the jewelry industry will always welcome new technologies that can reduce costs and empower creativity

Both. Today's technology has very few limits compared to what we were using ten years ago, but is surely very limited compared to what we will use in ten years time! The jewelry industry will always welcome new technologies that can reduce costs and empower creativity. T-Splines is an excellent example since it makes it much easier to model organic shapes and works within Rhino which is the industry standard for jewelry modeling. At Techjewel we have been working with Matt Sederberg, CEO of T-Splines, to develop a Rhinojewel version of T-Splines which will integrate with our exhisting tools to output creative results suitable for jewelry applications.

Rapid prototyping is another technology that has been embraced by jewelry designers. What is the level of use and the potential for future evolution?

the use of CAD applied to jewelry design would not be fully exploited without Rapid Prototyping

Of course the use of CAD applied to jewelry design would not be fully exploited without Rapid Prototyping. This technology has been improving steadily and has now reached a stage where - with the proper training - it is stable, easy to use and relatively affordable. 3D printers like Solidscape and other rapid prototyping solutions have long found their way into the manufacturing process of all the leading jewelry companies around the world and everyday more they are being adopted by the smaller independent workshops, either directly or through service bureaus. The best Rapid Prototyping solutions for jewelry make it possible to translate into the real world the many advantages available in the virtual space of CAD: cost reduction, shorter time-to-market, high precision and the ability to generate complex and creative designs which would otherwise be too difficult or impossible to achieve. In future the performance of Rapid Prototyping systems for jewelry applications will continue to improve and prices will gradually reach a level which will make direct ownership of this technology possible to anyone interested.

The Rhino platform offers a growing list of options for end-users, from several rendering alternatives to visual programming tools such as Grasshopper. What is your company's approach to these kinds of tools and technologies?

our first duty is to screen any new tool, software or technology that comes to market and to check its potential for jewelry applications

From the beginning the focus of TechJewel has always been on advancing the use of new technologies for the design and manufacturing of jewelry. In light of this, our first duty is to screen any new tool, software or technology that comes to market and to check its potential for jewelry applications. Sometimes, as in the case of photorealistic rendering engines, we need to select the best option out of numerous offerings. Other times we monitor a new technology until it is stable enough to be adopted within our industry. Wherever possible we work towards enhancing and integrating new solutions within our software RhinoJewel, to make them more relevant to the needs of jewelers as well as easier to learn from within one unique interface.

TechJewel is a Spanish company with deep European roots and important ambitions for the US market. What are the major problems you face when entering the American market and what is your strategy?

we are launching a RhinoJewel Academy program of 101 Video Tutorials

It is always easier to do well close to home. People are easier to contact and the main jewelry trade fairs throughout Europe are all reachable within a couple of hours flight. In Europe we meet face to face with our many resellers and clients and provide extensive training either at our facilities in Barcelona or at the client's premises.
All this is harder and more expensive to do with the American market, and also for the equally important markets in the Far East. So far we have relied on a network of distributors like yourselves. However, to further support our clients and resellers we are launching a RhinoJewel Academy program of 101 Video Tutorials which can take users from beginner level to a highly proficient advanced level. This self-paced educational material is the result of over 15 years experience in teaching CAD applied to jewelry design and draws from real-life professional jewelry projects. Students in remote areas will be able to learn on their own and access online help whenever they need to, either from us or from an international network of RhinoJewel Academy Instructors.
The full RhinoJewel Academy program will be made available through our resellers but we are also gradually adding 40 of the 101 Video Tutorials on our YouTube channel free of charge. The videos on YouTube will cover all the material from Level 1 to Level 3, plus samples of the tutorials from level 4 to Level 10.

I would like to thank Alex for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Alex or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Sample Tutorial of RhinoJewel TechJewel products are available from Novedge

Interview with Mark Vorwaller, VX CAD/CAM CEO

There is a CAD company that has been around for many years that makes a fully integrated CAD/CAM system offering a powerful combination of solid modeling and surface modeling few others can match, with a devoted following of loyal customers. Yet only a few users of CAD will mention this company's product in the list of their top 5 most popular CAD systems. This is because at VX all the energy goes into improving their CAD system rather than into marketing. The promotion of the system is mostly left to word of mouth. While it's an old marketing tool, and slow, if you have a great product it is also very effective. The person that shaped VX, the product, and VX, the company, is Mark Vorwaller. After meeting Mark for the first time at last year's COFES, I asked him for an interview.

Mark, can you tell us a bit about yourself and your company?

blending these modeling technologies gives VX customers superior power and flexibility

I co-founded Control Automation, Inc (CAI) in 1985 while engaged in post-graduate studies at the University of Florida's center for robotics. Control Automation's first project involved development of software controls for robot workcells. An in-house PC-based solid modeler was developed to support the project. The modeler was private-labeled by several software vendors and sold directly by CAI as ModelMATE. In 1989, CAI began joint development of a hybrid surface/solid modeler with a large Japanese company. The modeler used a combination of variational and parametric geometry, resulting in a new company name "Varimetrix". I believe that blending these modeling technologies gives VX customers superior power and flexibility designing parts and assemblies. Over time, the name "Varimetrix" was contracted to "VX" by customers and resellers, which is how we are known today.

Even though VX is a very powerful system it's not yet as popular as comparable CAD systems. Can you explain what makes VX different from your competitors?

users can learn VX on their own schedule and at their own pace

In my opinion the key differentiators for VX are (1) the robustness and flexibility of its hybrid surface/solid modeling, (2) its speed and effectiveness working with large parts and assemblies, (3) its ability to immediately work with any imported part – no solids required, (4) its hybrid history and direct-edit modeling, (5) its class A surfacing for sophisticated consumer products, (6) its scaleability with fully-associative native applications for reverse engineering, mold & die design and 2-5 axis CAM, (7) its ability to work robustly with non-native geometry and (8) its Show-n-Tell built-in e-learning system that works like a 3D book. Users can learn VX on their own schedule and at their own pace. Our customers tell us that these capabilities in VX are key to giving them a competitive edge.

Your product is one of the few systems that covers almost the entire design and manufacturing process, from idea conception to machining. What are the advantages and limitations of this holistic approach?

the user can only benefit from seamless integration and associativity across applications

I can only think of advantages. I am convinced that the user can only benefit from seamless integration and associativity across applications. If you modify a product design in VX, the associated mold designs, drawings and CAM process plans can be updated automatically. Everything is built on one architecture and one database, so there is no conversion of geometry and no loss of data or accuracy between applications. VX CAM ensures VX CAD generates clean and accurate geometry for manufacturing. It also requires that VX CAD works effectively with non-native geometry. With VX CAD/CAM, the customer does not have to deal with a conglomerate of products with differing user interfaces, release schedules, support systems and integration breakdowns.

In VX solid modeling and surface modeling are equal citizens, without any discrimination. How did you obtain this integration and what are the implications for the end user?

the current VX CAD/CAM is a second generation of hybrid surface/solid modeling based on our experience with the first implementation

The product we joint-developed in the late 80's and early 90's was intended to be an alternative to a leading CAD system known for its advanced surfacing capabilities. However, we wanted our product to include the power of solid modeling, which we had learned via our ModelMATE development. Parametric and variational geometry concepts were thrown in the mix because of their usefulness and because hardware was getting powerful enough to handle them.
Because this hybrid approach was architected from the ground up, instead of cobbled together from existing technologies, I believe we achieved an excellent result. The current VX CAD/CAM is a second generation of hybrid surface/solid modeling based on our experience with the first implementation. Though VX may not be well known, it is a pioneering developer of hybrid modeling.
Hybrid modeling combines the automation of solids with the flexibility of advanced surfacing, especially for consumer product design. Solid feature operations can be applied to surfaces and vice versa. Based on my experience, it is often easier to design a complex free-form shape when you are not constrained to maintain a solids topology at all times. Hybrid modeling is very useful for mold design, including the design of parting surfaces and the creation of cores and cavities. A robust hybrid modeling kernel ensures VX can work more easily with "dirty" geometry imported from other CAD systems. VX customers know that hybrid modeling gives them a power and flexibility that is unparalleled by solid-only or surface-only systems.

What is your opinion about the new CAD trend favoring a simpler modeling process mostly based on push-pull operations (aka direct modeling)?

I've felt for years that direct edit should be implemented in conjunction with history-based or other parametric modeling techniques

I've felt for years that direct edit should be implemented in conjunction with history-based or other parametric modeling techniques. In the early 90's, some products started out doing only "direct edit" style modeling, but were totally eclipsed by history-based modelers. Computer and geometric modeling technology were not powerful enough in that time-frame to compete with history-based modeling. Ultimately, a couple of the "direct modelers" added history-based modeling in an attempt to meet end-user needs, but they were ineffective after-the-fact efforts.
My vision from the early 90's was for modeling that combined surface and solid modeling (hybrid), and that also combined history and "direct edit" capability. Our original direct edit tools were ways to edit non-feature model geometry. In the early days, these were operations performed on individual faces (deletion, extension, modification, splitting, trimming, offsetting) that were unavailable in other history-based modelers. We then worked on "Simplify", a direct edit technology for removing faces, features or edges, and automatically closing resultant gaps. In every case, our direct edit operations are logged to the history to avoid losing its benefits, but they do not rely on the history to obtain their results.
The next step of VX Direct Edit focuses on being able to move individual faces or groups of faces (including disjoint faces) while keeping part topology intact. Faces can be dynamically dragged to their new position, or placed exactly by using dynamic snapping with automatic dimensions. The dimensions can be modified by dragging arrowheads or by entering exact values.
In summary, I favor a functional combination of direct and parametric modeling techniques. This is consistent with VX's history of combining the best features of different technologies into a single usable software.

If you could wear the end-user hat for a moment, what is the major feature that is still missing in current CAD/CAM software (including VX)?

Truly powerful and easy-to-use multi-physics analysis capability seamlessly embedded in the CAD system.

VX product line goes from $995 to $10K. What is the right price for a CAD/CAM system? Is the price a major issue in the purchasing decision process?

VX pricing is right for its average customer, typically a small-to-medium size company

I believe price is more and more a consideration for end-users, even in larger organizations. Some CAD industry pundits like to say it's not factor, or that it should not be a factor, given the other costs that surround the use of a CAD/CAM system. That rhetoric has been around for years, but CAD/CAM companies big and small continue to lower prices and use discounts to attract customers big and small. I believe small-to-medium companies are more price sensitive than large companies, but in the free economy, price will always be a factor.
VX pricing is right for its average customer, typically a small-to-medium size company looking for a tool with high-end power at an affordable cost. Nearly 50% of VX customers use VX End-to-End (CAD through CAM). They desire the integration and associativity VX provides from CAD through CAM without the complications and cost of a collection of third party products or of purchasing from the large vendors that dominate the automotive and aerospace industry. There are a handful of CAD products priced lower than VX, but in my opinion they provide neither the power nor the scalability of VX CAD/CAM.

I would like to thank Mark for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Mark or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Show-n-Tell Review & Markup Video VX CAD/CAM products are available from Novedge

Interview with Rafael del Molino, TDM Solutions CEO (RhinoGold)

Something must be right for jewelry design in Spain. Not only are several jewelry designers active in Spain, but Spain is also the source of some of the best and most popular software tools for jewelry design. Among those tools RhinoGold stands out as a reference point, setting standards both for features and customer support. The manufacturer of RhinoGold is TDM Solutions, a young company founded and led by Rafael del Molino. I interviewed Rafael to get a better idea of how RhinoGold is developed and sold all over the world.

Rafael, can you tell us a bit about yourself and your company?

TDM is working over 25 countries with more than 75 resellers

About myself. Since I was in the university, I was working in engineering stuff, specializing in the automobile industry. Sometime later, I found TDM Solutions to implement my CAD/CAM knowledge in companies. Since there, TDM Solutions has been an official distributor, training center and developers of Rhino-based applications.
Nowadays TDM is working over 25 countries with more than 75 resellers. Developer of design and manufacturing applications, enhancing RhinoGold, and other Rhino plug-in such as RhinoMold, RhinoNest and RhinoShoe.

What are the major reasons jewelry designers choose RhinoGold?

the designer finds confidence and security in our software and therefore chooses it

It is no secret that a product works in a combination of factors. First of all, without any doubt, we must offer a quality product. A product that truly meets the customer and helps/improves their work.
But, this is not the only requirement. This is not about selling a quality product and get the profits. We must provide a post-service. From TDM Solutions we provide personalized support by responding to their problems and concerns within 48 hours, via our forum, via e-mail, phone or connecting to our customer’s computer directly. In addition, we offer this service even before the customer buys the product, it means, when designer are using our 30-day evaluation version from our website.
Upon these basis, the designer /client finds confidence and security in our software and therefore chooses it.

What are the benefits for a company such as TDM to create software programs as plug-ins for Rhino rather than standalone applications?

our client can start working with our software even the first day

Rhino is a software with thousands and thousands of users, and for many areas. Creating plug-ins allows us to specify, and thus improve the possibilities of Rhino in each sector. Furthermore, the learning time of our software it’s shorter, understanding that the buyer already know (or want to know) how to use Rhino. Our client can start working with our software even the first day.
Nowadays, RhinoGold can be considered as a standalone software, having its own interface and allowing the designer to have only the jewelry tools.

Which new technologies from the Rhino platform (e.g. GrassHopper, T-Splines, etc.) will benefit TDM products and their users?

we have had some conversations to implement some of our products in other platforms

Well, right now, RhinoNest and GrassHopper are working together with a program called D.O.F., for architecture… very interesting. Furthermore, we have had some conversations to implement some of our products in other platforms, and we are working on it. So far, I cannot talk that much about that, we will see in the next months how it runs.

In your experience what are the major differences between the US and the European market for your products?

our customers are designers, so, they are different one from the other

honestly, our customers are designers, so, they are different one from the other. They are creative, doesn’t matter if it’s European or American or Asian. Maybe some prefer rings than bracelets, and others a specific pendant, but, all they need different tools, or at least, they use the tools in different ways.
Fortunately, RhinoGold offer such a vast variety of tools, so, so far, we have success in all the markets. Hopefully!

How do you involve and engage the jewelry designer community with the product development of new releases?

using RhinoGold, designers can spend more time in the creative part of the work

Goldsmiths must adapt to new technologies to be more efficient and effective on their business (for example, offering a better – faster and clearer – service to their customers). There are other sectors that some years ago nobody thought about the possibility to implement a software on the business, and now, those sectors cannot run without the software.
We firmly think that using RhinoGold, designers can spend more time in the creative part of the work (guessing it’s the preferred one) and do faster the tough ones.

What kind of feedback from your customers and beta testing do you value the most, and how do you incorporate that feedback back into new versions and products?

we are continuously improving our software

Any feedback is very welcomed. Everything helps to improve our software. We are continuously improving our software. For example, this week we have released a new Service for RhinoGold 2.0.
Also, we have RhinoGold labs. From our website and our Forum, users can give their opinion and post about their ideas. And, since the moment user posts it, our developer team starts working on these ideas. We have launched RhinoGold 2.0, but we already know and we are working on some new ideas for the next version.

I would like to thank Rafael for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Rafael or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

RhinoGold Training Video TDM Solutions products are available from Novedge

Interview with Craig Dennis, TransMagic CTO

Data translation is a critical technology and can be the source of many frustrations. As with many other important technologies, the better it works, the less visible it becomes. When we move a file from an external CAD system to our favorite design system, we are asking a complex algorithm to extract geometric data from a file and then translate it into a different proprietary file format. Most of the time the algorithm will successfully accomplish this little magic and the entire process goes almost completely unnoticed. Unless you get your software directly from Harry Potter, a software engineer has done all the hard work required for the magic to happen. If you get your translation software from TransMagic, the person behind the scenes creating and tuning the algorithms is Craig Dennis, TransMagic's CTO. With Craig's interview I'm trying to unveil some of that hidden magic and get Craig's take on the most common problems encountered in data translation.

Craig, can you tell us a bit about yourself and your professional activities?

I felt the pain with 3D and data exchange from the beginning of my career

My educational background is in Industrial Design and Mechanical Engineering. My career started as a Tool & Die Designer 17 years ago at a large machine shop doing tooling for the plastics packaging industry. I graduated to doing design engineering for the same industry. My CAD experience has always been in 3D starting with CADKEY, then SDRC I-DEAS and Pro/ENGINEER (although I actually learned to draw and perform projections on an actual drawing board! in college).
I felt the pain with 3D and data exchange from the beginning of my career. In those days all we had were IGES and STEP and really mainly just IGES. I’ve personally seen hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted in tooling that had been cut to the IGES surfaces resulting from faulty translation and this was in the plastics packaging industry. The waste in Automotive, Aerospace, Heavy Equipment, PowerGen, and on and on due to data translation issues is simply astronomical.
My career then transitioned to the software engineering world and I worked for a 3D software component supplier, Spatial, where I was an Application Engineer. I educated prospects and customers in the proper usage and implementation of the ACIS kernel using the C++ programming language. This leap from the trenches of the manufacturing industry to the manufacturing software industry rewarded me with a well rounded knowledge of the manufacturing industry needs as they pertain to the software provider. The single most lasting impression I had from those years was that data exchange was an even bigger issue than I realized as an end user.
In 2001 I became CTO and partner at TransMagic, Inc. with the goal of capitalizing on my unique broad-scope perspective of the manufacturing industry and applying my lessons and knowledge to perfecting 3D data exchange.

Data translation and data visualization are two markets with a certain overlap. Do you consider them as separate or do you believe they require different products and different approaches?

I consider [visualization & translation] separate technologies that belong together

I consider them separate technologies that belong together. In fact that was the exact premise of our first product at TransMagic, back in the days of “black box” CAD translators that output geometry you didn’t know was faulty until you tried to open it your CAD system. Who wouldn’t want to see their file before and after translation to do a quick visual validation if nothing else? In this way 3D visualization and data visualization address a similar need. The big difference comes when you need to perform downstream engineering operations on the translated data. For that you need real geometry, not triangles. There is a lot of important geometric information that is unavailable in triangulated models.
For the same reason, geometric data translation, validation and repair can only work on true geometry. In fact, this is a very difficult and intensive science unto itself. In geometric data translation highly sophisticated and specialized geometric algorithms are needed to properly map surface geometry from one format to another for the purposes of downstream manufacturing. In pure visualization these algorithms are simply not required.
Data translation applications will typically persist the 3D math data in memory (RAM) where it’s always accessible for highly precise calculations. As a result data translation apps will have a leg up on pure visualization apps in the areas of precise measurements, mass properties calculations and procedural-based polygon output such as used in high precision STL output.

In many software areas data translation is now considered a solved problem. Not so for CAD applications. What are the reasons moving data from one system to another is still a big issue?

At TransMagic, the problem of 3D data translation is largely solved

The reasons are multi-fold and each CAD vendor can likely cite one of these areas, if not publicly then internally, as the cause:

First, is the “single source” phenomenon where an engineering software provider develops applications (or add-ons) for the CAD, CAM & CAE specialties. For these companies it is in their best interest to interoperate seamlessly between their own apps so they can provide their customers with a complete software solution. As such, it is clearly NOT in the best interest of these software firms to offer seamless interoperability with their competitors engineering apps and thus lose potential revenue.

Second, is the complexity of 3D data exchange: Many engineering app developers are specialists in their own engineering space. Most of their development resources go to refining that specialty. 3D data exchange is a science and specialty unto itself. Sure, a sphere is a sphere, and a plane is a plane, but that view is overly simplistic. There are a myriad of geometric surface types and the mathematics for each differ greatly. Likewise, the technology behind each modeling kernel differs significantly. An engineering application developer might be an expert at their 3D modeling technology but they are typically not experts at all of them nor do they have the bandwidth to dedicate to the pursuit of perfecting 3D data translation.

Third, is version compatibility: Unlike some electronic formats, 3D geometric formats can and do change, constantly. Simply keeping up with these formats is a resource intensive pursuit.

Finally, 3D data translation is not a commodity. At TransMagic, Inc. (and I would wager many of our industry contemporaries would agree), the problem of 3D data translation is largely solved. The 3D interoperability market is getting more mature. TransMagic and our contemporaries have spent the better part of the last two decades perfecting this task. The proliferation of 3D data is very mature. The difference we’re seeing now is, companies want to include all manufacturing data in the same file with the 3D model. There is no commodity solution yet that ties all the different CAD systems and data types together. In the end, I believe it comes down to niche markets and qualities like ease, automation and affordability.
The 3D data translation needs of the engineering software community cannot be adequately addressed solely by the engineering software developers themselves. Instead a specialist software developer has emerged to address this need: The 3D Data Translation Expert…and the need for high quality 3D data translation has been met. It’s our mission to get the word out.

STL is consolidating its role as a key technology of every design and product development process. What user's problems and issues is your recent new product STL PRO addressing?

STL PRO addresses the common problems of getting good quality STL files by enabling the end user to receive multiple native CAD formats from customers vs. receiving STL files themselves

We have always offered STL output since our first release. Our STL PRO is a special package to address the specific needs of the Rapid Prototype (RP) market while keeping costs down. STL PRO addresses the common problems of getting good quality STL files by enabling the end user to receive multiple native CAD formats from customers vs. receiving STL files themselves. This approach eliminates the other main issue we routinely heard from RP users and that is: low quality STL files coming from their customer’s CAD systems. While most CAD systems can output STL files, their resolution is typically very limited. In many cases the highest resolution STL file from a CAD system is barely usable for a rough draft by most RP bureaus.
The STL PRO approach: Obtain native CAD files from your prospects and use STL PRO to generate the STL output. This is also a welcome change to the RP bureau’s customers as well as they don’t have to go through the additional steps of generating multiple STL files for the RP bureau. In addition STL PRO’s STL output is infinitely refineable to produce draft quality all the way up to extreme precision STL files. Our STL File Settings and procedural-based STL triangle generation always provide a high quality STL file from a solid.

TransMagic seems to move from the standalone approach to a more integrated plug-in architecture. What are the benefits for the end user and the implications of these changes? Is Data Translation going to become a technology hidden from the end user and embedded into software systems?

For anyone who uses the product, this means that they will experience consistent results using any application that is “Powered by TransMagic”

TransMagic is developed with a sophisticated plug-in architecture that allows a high level of flexibility in terms of product offerings. The TransMagic GUI, Inventor Add-Ins, SolidWorks Add-Ins and other partner applications from companies such as VX CAD/CAM, Dimensional Control Systems & NGRAIN, can all use the same TransMagic translation core behind the scene. This approach is helpful for companies who choose not to re-create the wheel and become translation experts. For our customers this means they can buy best-in-class products and there is no code duplication with an optimized product offering. For anyone who uses the product, this means that they will experience consistent results using any application that is “Powered by TransMagic”.
Our product interface is fully documented and callable by any scripting or programming language. Most users are up and running with it inside of 10 minutes. It can easily be hooked up to a PLM system or custom in-house application to process jobs automatically. In fact, now, PTC Windchill users can add a plug-in to their PLM that outputs any format, not just a PRT file (Powered by TransMagic, of course).
Our new Auto Repair Wizard makes about 100 checks before it gives the green light meaning the geometry has been validated. We automatically detect and resolve most translation issues during translation with this Wizard. The end user no longer needs to have expertise in 3D Data Translation. In most cases it is as simple as File->Open\File->Save when using TransMagic or an application Powered by TransMagic.

Working on Data Translation and Visualization software means to work with a schedule that is mainly defined by the new releases of the major CAD systems. How do you manage a development process in such a constrained context?

When many new CAD versions are released, we’re ready to go live simultaneously

We employ the Agile development philosophy and approach. This entails fully implementing, testing, and documenting feature and fixes as they are completed. With this philosophy TransMagic is never more than two weeks away from being able to release products. However, our typical cycle of a release (or service pack) every three months usually dovetails pretty well with the new CAD version adoption rates.
Another unique methodology that TransMagic has adopted is licensing the “CAD engines” from the various CAD vendors directly. We are very CAD-neutral and try to encourage our customers to use native file formats where possible. We go directly to the source and license the CAD engine from the developer. This provides three primary benefits: quality, performance and current version support. When many new CAD versions are released, we’re ready to go live simultaneously.

What are the most common mistakes of end users when moving data from one system or format to a different one?

[while moving CAD data] the most common mistake is using an IGES file

The most common mistake is using an IGES file when you could have used a native file or any other format. Our philosophy is to use native CAD parts or assemblies and when they are processed through TransMagic it’s a “mapping” from one kernel to another vs. a typical translation scenario such as IGES or STEP. We can readily handle IGES or STEP files, of course but the difference is that most contemporary CAD kernels are actually very high quality including ACIS and Parasolid. By accurately mapping geometry from one kernel to another, the process of using TransMagic is as simple as File->Open/File->Save.
Another very common mistake is that most people underestimate the power of using ACIS and Parasolid files for interoperability. When properly implemented, these two CAD kernels provide a very robust geometry engine for hundreds of engineering applications. If your source and target applications have native ACIS or Parasolid inside, chances are those formats are going to give you the same results as a native CAD file. It’s a quantum leap from IGES and typically better than STEP.

If you were a CAD manager and had to choose a file format for the long term archival of your company strategic data, which file format would you choose, and why?

[for the long term archival] use every format possible

This is an important question. Our recommendation is: Use Every Format Possible. For example, if you have a 50+ year archive requirement, don’t wager your whole future on one format such as STEP or IGES. We advocate saving them into many formats. This way if one or more of the archive formats becomes obsolete, you still have back-ups including the native CAD files themselves. Storage is now pennies per megabyte and getting cheaper all the time. This is an area where our TransMagic COMMAND interface becomes particularly valuable especially when integrated into an existing PLM/PDM system. For every PLM/PDM trigger, such as a design revision, the PLM/PDM system can make one single call to TransMagic and simultaneously produce any or all formats we support. Good future bets for archival in addition to the native CAD format itself would be: ACIS, Parasolid, JT (w/B-Rep), STEP and even IGES Solids (MSBO). The reason I mention the native CAD format commonly is that unless the CAD system becomes defunct (which can happen), TransMagic will continue to support even the earliest versions of the CAD systems and the native format may still be the first and best format to access years from now.

I would like to thank Craig for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Craig or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

STL PRO Demo Video TransMagic products are available from Novedge

Interview with Ellen Finkelstein, AutoCAD Author

The AutoCAD users' community stands on a few pillars, one of which is the "AutoCAD Bible", published by Wiley and refreshed every year in accordance to the new version of the AutoDesk product. The author of this important and popular book is Ellen Finkelstein, an AutoCAD and AutoCAD LT expert who also publishes a very popular weekly newsletter. Ellen is a prolific author, writing books for many software programs, most notably AutoCAD and AutoCAD LT as well as Microsoft PowerPoint. Continuing my exploration of the AutoCAD world, I interviewed Ellen and asked her a few questions. If you are an AutoCAD user, this can be an interesting read.

Ellen, can you tell us a bit about yourself and your professional activities?

I have two professional lives, one in AutoCAD and one in PowerPoint

I have two professional lives, one in AutoCAD and one in PowerPoint/presenting. On the AutoCAD side, I’m the author of AutoCAD 2010 & AutoCAD LT 2010 Bible (10th anniversary edition!). I publish the AutoCAD Tips Newsletter which contains new tips from my web site, www.ellenfinkelstein.com. In the past, I’ve been editor of Inside AutoCAD and written articles for that publication, Autodesk, and others.

Despite being the most popular CAD software, AutoCAD is frequently dismissed as not technically advanced. What keeps attracting millions of users to this program?

AutoCAD is pretty popular!

Actually, AutoCAD is pretty popular! But it’s in the middle. On one end, you have AutoCAD LT, which is less expensive and contains all the basic features that 2D drafters need. More people use it than AutoCAD. On the other side, you have Revit and Inventor, which are specialized, offer much more intelligence in the drawing, and so on. So, many people gravitate to one end or the other of the spectrum.

You have been working, writing, and teaching about AutoCAD for quite some time. During this time, has AutoCAD changed in any unexpected ways?

I’ve been pleased at the new features that Autodesk has added

Not really. I’ve been pleased at the new features that Autodesk has added, especially 3D features and the new parametric constraints.

If you could recommend a new feature for the next AutoCAD version what it would be?

Inventor recently added 3D dimensions which are very cool. I’d also like to see 3D dynamic blocks.

With the Internet offering countless opportunities for AutoCAD users, from users' forums to video training, what is role of a book such as the "AutoCAD 2010 Bible"?

us old-timers still like to use books

I think all types of training can be useful, but us old-timers still like to use books! But seriously, almost everyone needs to sit and read about a feature in depth from time to time. Forums and video training cover topics in brief, but my book covers them in depth, and then offers an exercise to practice. People search on the Internet for issues and find these forums and video training, but they also find tips and tutorials on my site. I also include video lessons for a tip, sometimes. So, I really offer both. In fact, the book’s DVD contains videos of parametric constraints and 3D meshes.
People may not realize that the AutoCAD Bible’s DVD contains the book in (non-printable) PDF format, which is search-able. This makes finding what you need pretty easy.

How do you collect, select, and organize the information required your AutoCAD books?

The first time was really, really hard. Now, I’m just updating...

The first time was really, really hard. Now, I’m just updating, so it’s much easier. But I always consider carefully how to organize new material so that people can understand it if they’re reading through the book from start to finish, as some new learners do. Each year, I participate in the beta program (which is excellent) and make a pretty complete list of new features. I assign each feature to the appropriate chapter and then start writing!

You are an inexhaustible source of AutoCAD tips and tricks. How do you find new and original tips and tricks each week for your blog readers and newsletter subscribers?

AutoCAD has lots and lots of features

It’s getting harder and harder! I welcome ideas from my readers and subscribers, and sometimes their questions are the spark for a new tip. I use my book as a major source as well. Sometimes, I just explain a feature in detail in a tutorial, and AutoCAD has lots and lots of features.

I would like to thank Ellen for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Ellen or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Ellen PowerPoint Sample Training Ellen Finkelstein tips for AutoCAD and PowerPoint
are available at www.ellenfinkelstein.com

Interview with Jonathan Pickup, Vectorworks Guru and Trainer

Every CAD system has its own group of fans and gurus. The excitement of CAD fans for their favorite design system doesn't stop in front of obstacles or barriers. Vectorworks fans are no exception. Among them the most knowledgeable and active is certainly Jonathan Pickup (website, blog, twitter). Despite living in the green land of New Zealand thousand miles away, on the opposite site of the planet from Nemetschek NA, he has become one of the most active experts and trainers of the Vectorworks community. His architectural background makes him extremely effective in creating a connection between the features of Vectorworks and its users. Jonathan's training sessions avoid technical jargon and speak the language of architects and designers. He has generously published most of his training online where it's available for free. Let's ask Jonathan some questions about himself and his favorite CAD system.

Jonathan can you tell us a bit about yourself and your professional activities?

I'd always wanted to be an architect and I love creating buildings

I trained as an architect in New Zealand. I'd always wanted to be an architect and I love creating buildings. After graduating the Auckland University School of Architecture and working in several places in New Zealand, I traveled to London where I worked for a large company called BDP. I was there for seven years working on many cool projects like the All England Lawn Tennis Club, National Maritime Museum, and shopping centers.
CAD was not a big thing when I got to London. Hardly anyone used it. Within a few years a few practices were using CAD. BDP had their own system. I was keen to learn the CAD, especially keen when the recession in the early '90's hit. There weren't many CAD operators and I wanted to keep my job, so I worked hard at being good. A few years layer BDP moved to MicroStation and they sent me away to learn how to use that. I was promoted to CAD manager on several projects.
It was about this time that I leaned MiniCAD 3+. That’s how long I've been using Vectorworks, since version 3.

What makes Vectorworks different from or better than other architectural design programs?

Vectorworks may not be better than other programs, but if you can learn to use it really well, it will feel better than other programs

At the time I learned MiniCAD, there were very few 3D programs. Vectorworks seemed so easy to use. Compared to MicroStation, Vectorworks was so easy to use. Now there are more programs that compete with Vectorworks. But Vectorworks still has a easy to use set of tools, and it has some powerful tools.
I have worked hard to build training resources for Vectorworks, and other programs do not have the resources we have. Vectorworks may not be better than other programs, but if you can learn to use it really well, it will feel better than other programs. My next door neighbor uses another CAD program and we've know each other for several years. We chat over the letter box at the end of the driveway. He wishes that his CAD program that the resources that I write, and the regular monthly training I provide. I told him to swap to Vectorworks and he could enjoy it too!

You have extensive experience producing training material. How are new technologies changing the way we learn and use our design programs?

a lot of people just don't realize how easy it is to learn a program with the embedded movies

When I first started writing manuals, I used Microsoft Word. It allows you to do a great deal, and write short manuals quickly. Combine that with a reasonable computer and printer and you can generate high quality manuals. Now you can create PDF files and get the manuals printed on demand.
I have been producing manuals with embedded movies for several years now. I think a lot of people just don't realize how easy it is to learn a program with the embedded movies. The movies let you get the whole picture, and get it quickly. Giving my clients movies has really improved.
The change in the last year has been my ability to provide online training. This has allowed me to offer small amounts of training when the client needs it. I run all my courses on line now. This allows me to be really flexible and it allows me to have students from all over the world.
I only have a few people at each course, I can see their screen if I need to, I can watch them work and I can correct any mistakes. This technology has been a big change for me and my clients. I have started to train clients all over the world.
This allows small amounts of training, bite sized bits of training. Small amounts of training allows the training to be digested before the next session. It allows practice between sessions, which reinforces the learning.
Before this, clients had to travel to my sessions, and I had to travel to different towns. Now I travel to their computer where ever they are. Should I mention the environmental savings?

Vectorworks users have access to several sources of information, from help files and manuals, discussion forums, online videos, and now, your book. Where does your book fit in this crowded set of options? Who should read your book?

my manuals are designed to show you how to compete a task

The Help Files and User Guides are great at showing exactly how to use one tool, but they are no good at showing you how to complete a task. A task uses several tools and commands. Some of these will not be obvious. My manuals are designed to show you how to compete a task. Each month I write a manual for my subscribers, and these show how to complete tasks that are not in any other manuals. For example, one month we covered a room finish schedule. from start to finish, all the steps need to complete the finish schedule, why some things work and why some things don't work. I like to give the reasons why things work, and the reasons why I do things. So, for example, if I'm talking about making layers and classes, I like to tell people why I use these layers and classes. I guess this is what sets my manuals and movies apart.
As for the 3D manual, it has been designed for people that want to get into 3D modeling. The manual starts with very simple modeling, covering all the basic tools and commands. 3D working is a lot of fun and I wanted everyone to see how easy it can be and how much fun you can have. So, if you want to use Vectorworks like SketchUp, if you want to draw a building with out walls, or you want to get into free-form design, try this manual.

Architectural design comes late to the world of 3D modeling. How do you explain this delay?

the problem is that many architects do not see that 3D modeling with a CAD program is useful

I'm not sure I can explain it. I started 3D modeling in MiniCAD 3+. That was a long time ago.
Not all of my employers have been keen to allow me to work in 3D. One employer was quiet strong on preventing me working in 3D, but I did anyway and he used to the 3D model to solve several design issues. So, maybe it's just the the employers do not think that 3D modeling in any CAD program can help them. Vectorworks has had some pretty cool 3D abilities for a long time. I could be wrong, but I think we have have had NURBS modeling since Vectorworks version 9.
So, I don't think the problem is the lack of software. The problem is that many architects do not see that 3D modeling with a CAD program is useful. After all, they have been drawing and sketching all these years without a CAD program.
I used to work for an architect. I taught him and his office Vectorworks, and I also worked for him as an architect. We were working on a renovation and extension project for a school. The architect had sketched the 3D look of the project, and had decided how the connections and junctions between the old building and new building should be. I was told to get on with the drawings, there is no need to much around with the 3D model. However, I noticed that the sketch wasn't accurate. The buildings were not relating they way the architect wanted. So, against instructions, I spent ten minutes to work on a 3D model to show the architect what the real situation was. When he came over to see me there was the 3D model, and the connection problems. He was happy to see the model and we spent thirty minutes working on the project, resolving all kinds of issues. At the end he was really happy with the solution, and it wasn't the same as his sketch.
I've always thought that 3D model to speed up the construction drawings, but more importantly, we should use the 3D model to improve the quality of the design. The challenge for a lot of users is learning to model the design when it is not a traditional building, or how to create a fast block model, like I did for the architect. That is where my 3D modeling manual comes in. Clients that buy this manual will learn the basic tools first, the ones that are quick to use, and they will learn how to take a block and cut it, pull it and shape it to make a concept. And, they will learn those cool curving shapes.

Many design software programs sustain an of ecosystem of blogs, online communities, technical books, etc. Vectorworks users are only now recognizing and organizing themselves online. As one of the most active Vectorworks users, can you help us understand the new surge in online participation?

When I started to blog [...] I wanted something that would be useful for my clients and other users of Vectorworks

Many younger people are especially active online. When I stared blogging a few years ago, there was a lot of people already blogging, but it was mainly for personal reasons. Now there are a lot of blogs for business, and many more are blogging now. An online presence is now an essential part of your business.
When I started to blog, I didn't really want to make my blog about me and my life. I thought that might be too dull! But I thought I could make my blog about Vectorworks tips and tricks. .
Vectorworks have started to invest in the community board and they have really made an effort in blogging, and social media. You interviewed Jessie Newburn recently, she is amazing with the effort she puts in and I think that is bringing more users online.

How did you approach the task of writing a technical book such as "3D Modeling in Vectorworks"? How did you select the content and organize it?

when my students start to have fun with Vectorworks, they start enjoy it more, and they learn more easily

The 3D side of Vectorworks has always been the most fun. When my students start to have fun with Vectorworks, they start enjoy it more, and they learn more easily. I have been teaching simple 3D modeling for a long time, since the days of MiniCAD (the name before VectorWorks). It was fun to teach and fun for the students.
A simple introduction to 3D modeling has always been part of my Essential Tutorial Manual, but I had requests from some clients that wanted to see more. As I showed more techniques with 3D modeling, the students asked for more. This manual is the result. Like all my manuals, the students tell me what they want to learn, and I develop exercises that make it simple.
For the manual I used these exercises, and developed more basic exercises to explain all the basic 3D tools and commands. Then I developed a bus stop exercise that was designed to bring together several techniques. I used the bus stop because it would suit several people, architects, landscapers, urban designers and exhibit designers.

I would like to thank Jonathan for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Jonathan or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Jonathan Pickup Sample Training Jonathan Pickup training books are available
from Novedge (Look on the Training section)

Alibre CEO Paul Grayson Discusses the New Pricing Structure

The recent decision by Alibre to drop the price of their entry level product Alibre Design Standard from $999 to only $99 generated a wave of reaction throughout the CAD world (see the blog posts by Deelip Menezes, Roopinder Tara, Matt Lombard, and Ralph Grabowski). The decision caught everyone by surprise. Even at a time when the recession is pushing most CAD manufacturers to substantially lower the price of their products with specials and promotions, Alibre's decision is still shocking. My first reaction was not very positive and only after I took some time to analyze the details did I switch to a more positive position. Like many people out there I still have some doubts about the implications of this radical price drop. The main question is if this change will have a positive expanding effect on the market or if it will simply re-orient buyers that were already close to a buying decision. The only person that can help me and Novedge blog readers understand Alibre's decision and evaluate its implications is Alibre CEO Paul Grayson. Here is the interview.

Paul, can you tell us a bit about yourself and your company?

I started Alibre in 1997 after having spent 14 years as the founder and CEO of Micrografx

I started Alibre in 1997 after having spent 14 years as the founder and CEO of Micrografx, a company which went public on the coattails of Microsoft Windows 3.0 in 1990 and reached about $100M in sales and 400 employees before merging with Corel in 2000. Prior to Micrografx, I was a software developer working primarily at manufacturing companies, where I developed a passion for product development and manufacturing.

Alibre has always promoted the idea that its products provide 80% value at 20% of the price. Is this still a valid way to describe your product line?

we provide 100% of the functionality that the vast majority of people need to get their jobs done

Honestly, that is a bit too modest. I think we represent significantly more than 80% of the value for 20% of the cost, especially with the $99 price offer. But more importantly, we provide 100% of the functionality that the vast majority of people need to get their jobs done. We may not have all of the bells and whistles of SolidWorks, Inventor, Pro/Engineer, etc., but our customers tell us that having a simpler, streamlined, easier-to-learn user interface with a complete, but not overbearing set of features, is a real advantage. Our competitors have become overburdened with unnecessary complexity and a multiplicity of ways to do the same operations, which just leads to user confusion, difficulty of learning, and the need for constant retraining.
Can the designer make the model, verify it, detail the drawing, and send it to a manufacturer in a timely and efficient manner with Alibre Design? That’s the question. In an overwhelming percentage, the answer is yes.
We serve the full needs of the vast majority of small and medium sized businesses that design mechanical products. So to answer the question very clearly, if you make cars or enormous, extremely intricate industrial equipment with 10,000 parts, we aren’t for you. If you’re like most companies, we are.

Your recent decision to drop the price of Alibre Standard to only $99 has shocked the entire CAD market (myself included). Can you explain the reason behind this decision, the expected effects, and the implications for the end-users?

Our mission is to make 3D CAD available to everyone that wants or needs it

That’s a lot of big questions in one, so let’s look at them one at a time. We had a healthy internal debate about this strategy. There were concerns about possible cannibalization or creating the perception that we were desperate. It really came down to a passionate desire to enable customers to experience Alibre Design and to take a bold step to increase awareness and adoption.
We have 10’s of thousands of satisfied customers worldwide and an obsession to reach everyone that we can. Our mission is to make 3D CAD available to everyone that wants or needs it. Our previous marketing initiative, Alibre Design Xpress, was very successful in reaching hundreds of thousands of users and motivating many of them to move to our paid products. We know that when customers give our products a chance, they love them. And they recommend them to their associates and colleagues. “Word of Mouth” is our most common lead source and the most effective form of marketing. This offer is all about shaking up the CAD industry, creating controversy, getting the industry talking about us, and most important getting customers to try our product and discover for themselves how great it is. We know that if we do that, we will be richly rewarded, in business and financial success, but even more importantly by the success of our customers in creating innovative products and exciting careers for themselves.

we had the expectation that there are large numbers of serious designers that need a professional CAD system but can’t afford it right now

The interesting thing is that many of our customers start at Standard but almost inevitably end up migrating up the food chain. The majority of our customers use Professional or Expert, which is indicative of the fact that they find real value in moving up as they become more accomplished with the product. We expected to see a lot of individuals and personal users that just want to get the $99 deal, but we thought “why not?” We also had the expectation that there are large numbers of serious designers that need a professional CAD system but can’t afford it right now. These people will want training, maintenance, and will eventually move up to higher-level products when they have the resources and the reason to do so. The promotion has only been running for the 2 days and it has already greatly exceeded our expectations. From the people we’ve talked to we are hearing that our assumption was valid. All we’ve done is remove the prohibitive up-front cost. That’s it.

we’re going to get a lot of instant adoption from serious designers that do not currently have a CAD option for their budget

So the expected effects of this promotion are that we’re going to get a lot of instant adoption from serious designers that do not currently have a CAD option for their budget, that they will be successful with our product, and that they will talk about it. When people try us, they like us, and they stay with us. They will eventually move up our product line (at a very reasonable cost), they will find value in yearly maintenance (also a very reasonable cost), and the end result is that this is not a $99 revenue stream for us.

end-users are [...] getting a heinous deal. Something they will never see again

Some people have claimed this is a bait-and-switch. Well, the bait is $99, no argument there. The “switch”, if we want to play into that terminology, is that we expect those that take advantage of the offer will realize they got a great deal and will voluntarily give us more money in the form of keeping that great deal up to date with maintenance and learning to use it efficiently with training. We don’t feel bad about that, and we aren’t hiding it. The various options to buy with training and maintenance alongside the deal are prominently shown on the promotion page.
The implications for end-users are pretty straightforward. They are getting a heinous deal. Something they will never see again, and that can’t be touched by any competitor offering the tools that we do. Like we said – there are no gimmicks involved. It’s pretty much that simple.

Is this drop in price a limited time special offer or something that will continue even after the new release of 12?

we originally planned for this to be a very short-term offer

We originally planned for this to be a very short-term offer, just long enough for the marketing buzz to build and our channel partners to exploit the surge in demand. However, it is so successful already, that we are considering extending it by a week or two to give people who respond quickly the opportunity to take advantage of it. A key consideration for us is the availability of V12, which is in the final stages or endurance testing. That, at a minimum, puts a book-end on the offer.

Selling and promoting a $99 product requires a completely different approach compared with selling a $900 product. What changes are planned in your processing and marketing strategies?

our marketing strategy for this offer is to get it in front of as many people as possible as quickly as possible

Since this is a one time, temporary promotion, the biggest thing we had to take into account was the processing side of things. Accommodating the amount of inquiries, web traffic, etc. was something we had to prepare for and we’re lucky we did. Sales have taken off.
As far as marketing it – the promotion really speaks for itself. Our marketing strategy for this offer is to get it in front of as many people as possible as quickly as possible. We decided to embrace an Internet centric announcement and promotion model, starting with bloggers and industry insiders such as you, Kenneth Wong, Ralph Grabowski, Matt Lombard, Deelip Menezes, Roopinder Tara, and others. We decided to release the news on our blog first and then just rely on folks like you that are truly passionate about the CAD industry and that watch and report on everything that is happening. We knew the deal is too good not to talk about – in fact it’s unheard of - and as we’ve seen many bloggers and news sites immediately picked it up.

there’s a huge difference between being desperate and being opportunistic

In general this would not be successful in the long run without buy-in from our reseller channel. After a healthy discussion about the pros and cons with many of them, we found that with few exceptions everyone was on board with the idea of a massive influx of new users, even if it is at a very temporary loss in margins. The mid and long term benefits outweigh the short term. We just happen to be in the unique position to be able to do this – none of our competitors can. There’s a huge difference between being desperate and being opportunistic. It’s just that when most vendors are opportunistic, it’s a zero-sum game and the consumer loses. In this case, the consumer wins and so do we.

It's getting more and more difficult to find excuses to justify the purchase of a 2D CAD system or to postpone the switch to a 3D system. Despite that the 2D CAD market seems to be immortal. What's your take on this topic?

in this industry, customers are later adopters, they have come to depend on their 2D products to get the job done

In my opinion, this is due to a “generational” shift that is in the process of occurring. Mechanical engineers and product designers can be very conservative. At Micrografx, our customers were all early adopters, eager to adopt new technology (like Microsoft Windows and Graphic User Interfaces). In this industry, customers are later adopters, they have come to depend on their 2D products to get the job done and they are not willing to take any perceived risk with a major product change.
These products are truly mission-critical to them. Combine that with the conservative nature of the users, the extensive experience and skills that they have mastered and you have a real barrier to change that will likely only be overcome as new people come into the market. In addition, 2D users have learned to “think” in 2D. They can look at a 2D drawing and visualize what it looks like in 3D. This is a unique talent, almost like mastery of a foreign language. Which means that asking a 2D user to switch to 3D is sort of like asking you to learn French after a lifetime of speaking English. But, when you realize all your competition speaks French, you become more compelled to learn it. It isn’t a question of if, but of when.

If the recession and outsourcing are reducing the market size for CAD systems what should be done to sustain the innovation and evolution of CAD technologies?

the CAD industry needs to move into the modern age and embrace volume-oriented business models

The prevailing sales and marketing philosophy in the CAD industry has been to sell fewer and fewer seats for more and more money. Basically it is a zero-sum game where the big guys are all trying to knock each other out with aggressive direct sales forces and predatory sales practices. It is all about getting large accounts to switch while making them pay exorbitant prices to cover an inefficient business model.
Unfortunately, this has also had the impact of restricting the availability of very important design productivity tools to only those in the financial position to afford it. Many smaller companies and individuals are left out. The recession is changing all of that. Companies and business managers have become frugal and tight cost management is a necessity of survival. This situation is expected to last for years, even if the economy has started to turn upward.
The CAD industry needs to move into the modern age and embrace volume-oriented business models that reach an increasing set of customers as software and hardware prices ride the technology curve. First and foremost they need to realize this isn’t about exclusivity, it’s about ubiquity. Imagine how many more people stand to benefit, how many great products and great companies could be created, if the tools and technology for 3D design and manufacturing were affordable and broadly available.

I would like to thank Paul for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Paul or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Alibre 11 Design Overview Alibre products are available from Novedge

Interview with Kenneth Wong, CAD Journalist and Blogger

When I first met Kenneth Wong here in San Francisco my thoughts were not focused on the missing aureola of acronyms that impeccably decorates all his pictures. While shacking his hand I was repeating to myself: "I'm meeting one of the last CAD journalists, a very endangered species. I don't know if I'll ever meet another one before they all go extinct." In the past few years we have been so busy exploring the benefits of blogs, Twitter, and Facebook that we have almost completely missed the gradual extinction of CAD journalists and magazines (thanks to Al Dean there is at least one exception). Now it's time to look at the CAD press not anymore as a legacy of the past, but as a component of the new CAD ecosystem. Following Kenneth Wong and the emerging generation of CAD journalists we are witnessing a transformation process that will make the new press a critical player in the way we produce and consume technical information. Here is Kenneth's interview.

Kenneth can you tell us a bit about yourself and your professional activities?

when I’m looking for stories, I pay attention to not just the technological angle but also the human angle

Nearly a decade ago, in one of my temp jobs, I ended up as a receptionist for a publishing firm in San Francisco. It was the same firm responsible for producing Cadence magazine (no longer in existence). The magazine’s editor in chief, Arnie Williams, noted I had a flair for writing and a curiosity about technology. So he hired me as a junior editor. That was my introduction to CAD. Since then, I’ve also cycled through a number of computer games and digital video magazines as an editor. At the moment, I’m Desktop Engineering’s resident MCAD writer and blogger. My writings also appear in Architecture Week, Computer Graphics World, Cadalyst, and other outlets.
Unlike many of my colleagues, I studied literature in school, not engineering. So when I’m looking for stories, I pay attention to not just the technological angle but also the human angle. I’m a first-generation immigrant, born and raised in Burma, Southeast Asia.

You have been working in the CAD field as a journalist for some time. Can this market support a magazine and a team of independent journalists, or will we have to rely on bloggers and press releases in the future?

Instead of magazines, we now have brands: Desktop Engineering, Cadalyst, Manufacturing Business Technology, to name but a few

We used to think of a magazine as a book published monthly. But in the past decade, that model has changed considerably. Instead of magazines, we now have brands: Desktop Engineering, Cadalyst, Manufacturing Business Technology, to name but a few. They’re made up of printed issues and a slew of properties associated with them, such as newsletters, blogs, webcasts, podcasts, and forums. CAD bloggers like SolidSmacks and Deelip emerged as recognized brands in their own rights because they give compelling reasons for people to rely on their insights and judgments.
This creates new fields and venues. Small businesses that can’t afford to run print ads can now participate online. In the end, we may have fewer printed magazines, but a richer media landscape, supported by a greater number of advertisers. I doubt the day will come when press releases become people’s prime source of news. As we all know, they are anything but independent.

Your style as a journalist is focused on the user's perspective. Can you share with us the process you go through when creating a typical article?

You won’t find a lot of technical details in my writing

When deciding to pursue a story, I always ask, “Would a user care?” You won’t find a lot of technical details in my writing. If I’m writing a feature story on a new product release, I’d rather focus on how easy (or difficult) it is to create dimensions in it than on what the modeling kernel is. I frequently broadcast the topics I’m considering in my Twitter and Faceboook updates, just to get readers’ reaction. I also scan comments on popular CAD blogs to identify people I could interview. On several occasions, I contacted them and asked them to provide quotes for my stories. In Desktop Engineering’s Virtual Desktop newsletter, which I’m responsible for, I regularly feature “Tweet of the month” and “Reader comment of the month,” culled from what readers have to say about certain topics. I think their opinion matters just as much as mine.

For several years, pervasive use of 3D in browsers has been perceived by many as the next big thing. But it hasn't happened, or at least not on a popular scale. What are the reasons for this delay?

The mouse-and-keyboard combo is perfectly suited for text input, but a handicap for manipulating 3D

Partly, it has to do with how we interact with computers. The mouse-and-keyboard combo is perfectly suited for text input, but a handicap for manipulating 3D. The other factor is the lack of standard for repackaging 3D CAD data for the Web. I’m hoping Google’s O3D open API (http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/) will serve as a rallying call for this cause. By the way, online games and virtual communities like World of Warcraft and Second Life are doing a good job cultivating a groundswell for browser-based 3D. Online communities like Dassault’s 3DVIA and 3D ContentCentral represent similar efforts. I think light-hearted, consumer-friendly Web 3D will pave the way for the more serious implementations to come.

How does your approach differ when writing an article compared to writing a blog post?

I see blogging as a way to connect with the readers on a more personal level

In my news articles, I seldom use the first-person voice. I usually keep the “I” out of the text and simply report the facts. In blog posts, my thoughts, my reactions, and my quirky personality are as much a part of the story as the facts. I take that approach because I see blogging as a way to connect with the readers on a more personal level.

Silicon Valley venture capitalists seem to be attracted to all sort of technologies except CAD and 3D technologies (with very few exceptions). As a CAD expert and resident of the Bay Area and Silicon Valley region do you have an explanation for this?

CAD market is growing [...] without the kind of wild swings that give VCs an adrenaline rush

I’m no expert on venture capitalists (VCs), but they seem to be dictated by hype, buzz, rumors, and market volatility. CAD market is growing (as seen in CIMdata’s annual reports), but it’s a safe, steady market without the kind of wild swings that give VCs an adrenaline rush. I think VCs who’re in it for the long haul should consider CAD.

What should CAD bloggers learn from CAD journalists and what should CAD journalists learn from CAD bloggers?

bloggers have shown us that, in the new era, a story is on ongoing dialog

CAD bloggers stand to gain a lot of credibility by adopting some traditional journalistic practices, like taking the time to fact-check before posting something, citing respected sources and statistics to reinforce their points, and balancing a story with opposing viewpoints. Journalists should learn to blog and use social media (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, for example) to engage with their readers the way bloggers do. Traditionally, journalists think of a story as an essay or a speech. Bloggers have shown us that, in the new era, a story is on ongoing dialog. So let’s talk!

I would like to thank Kenneth for taking the time to answer my questions. If you have any questions for Kenneth or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Kenneth's Virtual Desktop Video Edition To view all issues of Kenneth Wong
Virtual Desktop Video Edition visit DE Channel on youTube.