NOVEDGE blog

An Interview with David Opsahl, CEO of Actify (Spinfire)

David Opsahl is the CEO of Actify, the company that makes the SpinFire products for CAD data visualization. The CAD data visualization market is going through some very important changes with acquisitions (Cimmetry and Agile) and new products (Acrobat 3D) available to end users. Actify has been in this market for several years and has witnessed this evolution. In order to get a qualified opinion on the implications of these changes I walked the few San Francisco blocks that separate Novedge from Actify and interviewed David. Here is the interview.

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

Sure. I’ve been involved with manufacturing software since 1977, first as a user at companies like Boeing and Bechtel, and then on the vendor side at companies such as Computervision [acquired by PTC]. Tecnomatix [acquired by UGS, acquired by Siemens], Division [acquired by PTC], PTC, Aspect Development, Adaptive Media, and Cardonet. I’ve done a variety of tasks at each of these places, from software engineering, applications engineering, sales and sales management, general manager, and business development. I became involved with Actify in 2004 when I was asked to join them as vice president of business development.

Actify has been in the business of making CAD data visualization software -- or DDC (Digital Design Communication) as you like to call it -- for many years. What are the main changes you have seen in this market?

view, measure, markup isn’t the business problem, merely one tool needed to solve the business problem

In some respects, I’ve not seen much in the way of change. From a pure “visualization” perspective, things in this market are more or less like they’ve always been in this market, and we still struggle with many of the challenges companies in this space did ten years ago – that is, of course, if you define the problem as “view, measure, and markup” of 2D and 3D CAD data as I think most people do. Having said that, there are some changes worth mentioning. One is the inclusion of PMI data as part of what we can expose downstream of engineering – that is a huge opportunity for improving communications in the manufacturing industry. Another is the recognition in the market that “view, measure, markup” isn’t the business problem, merely one tool needed to solve the business problem. That leads to a whole different way of looking at the business.

Until recently DDC (Digital Design Communication) was a business of small and medium companies. Now with Adobe and Oracle entering the arena of DDC, what is going to change?

they (Adobe) have the potential to solve the premier roadblock to innovation in this space: the data format problem

Honestly, I don’t think that much will change, at least not quickly. Where Adobe is concerned, they have the potential to solve the premier roadblock to innovation in this space – the data format problem. I can’t think of any other industry where application data so critical to improving business performance is locked away in proprietary formats. And the CAD vendors for the most part like to see it that way, and while I think the days of proprietary formats are numbered, we have a ways to go . With respect to Oracle, I don’t see them having any impact on the market. PLM vendors have tried many times to make visualization a part of their solution, and it doesn’t seem to help them sell more software. Oracle bought Adaptive Media’s visualization software years ago, and if you aren’t using Oracle PLM you never see it. I could be wrong, but I think Oracle bought Agile for Agile and Eigner [acquired by Agile], not for Cimmetry – although I think Autovue is a good fit for Oracle’s platform and will become part of their offering. But that only changes the market for Oracle’s products – and the trickle down there, if any, remains to be seen.

I have expressed a few times the opinion that DDC products have a huge unexploited potential. What is blocking products like SpinFire from becoming more popular in the design and manufacturing industry?

get rid of (the format problem), and you’ll see lots of breakout innovation in this space

I’ll go right back to what I said earlier – the format problem. Get rid of that, and you’ll see lots of breakout innovation in this space. Secondly, the unexploited potential I believe has to do with the utilization of data by folks some distance away in terms of skills and experience from engineers – and that tends to drive product development for in our market from a different perspective. If one defines success in this industry by the number of people outside engineering who pay for a capability and then, year after year, renew their commitment to that product financially, I think we tend to lead the market in that area.

Historically companies in the DDC industry considered data translation a different business than data visualization. Each addresses different users and requires different products. Acrobat 3D is changing this unwritten rule. Is Adobe breaking a taboo or making a mistake?

in Acrobat 3D, it isn’t apparent to me how you would export to another CAD format

I don’t know if I agree with your premise that Acrobat 3D is changing this unwritten rule. Clearly they have that ability technologically, but I don’t know if that means they will exploit it. In the current version of Acrobat3D (V8) that I have, it isn’t apparent to me how you would export to another CAD format, which I think is what you are talking about. On top of that, if they solve the format problem, then the need for translators is moot, isn’t it? Although I can’t speak for them, if I were Adobe I would want PRC to be supported by the CAD vendors given a choice.

Some companies are exploring the possibility of bringing the CAD viewer inside the web browser without requiring the installation of plugins thanks to new technologies such as Ajax. What is your opinion on and vision for this new approach?

No question in my mind you will see more product development done in this area, but there are some serious technology challenges in making this work. Not all of them have to do with the parts of the problem Ajax solves. Not to sound repetitive, but to a large degree innovation in this area faces some of the same roadblocks we discussed earlier. For instance, eliminating plug-ins requires extremely efficient code that can be downloaded in real-time or near real-time. In order to do that job in the most efficient matter, the data format must also be highly efficient, and the industry isn’t there – yet. And, there will always be the need to allow people to work “disconnected “, so a world without plug-ins doesn’t necessarily solve the problem.

A few years ago Actify tried to enter the corporate market with a client server solution. For lack of determination the experiment didn’t fully succeed. Have you given up on this new market or do you have other plans?

the Actify vision some years back was very well thought out, but perhaps ahead of its time

The Actify vision some years back was very well thought out, but perhaps ahead of its time, and along the way, I think its evolved somewhat. The original client/server solution was envisaged as something similar to what Outlook and Exchange are today, if taken alone. However, there are a number of needs in a collaboration solution not provided by that model. Today, if one looks at the Office platform, with tools like Sharepoint, Infopath, and so forth, you can see how that vision for Outlook and Exchange has become much richer. Our vision has evolved similarly, but one can easily see how that original model has continued to be the starting point.

Actify is an innovative company, with a tradition of embracing new technologies in their early stages. What technologies do you see out there now that could play a role in you current or future products?

As much as I’d like to answer that question – I won’t, for obvious reasons. What I can tell you is that we have no intention of eliminating our history of technological innovation. To the contrary, I believe fairly soon we’ll have some things to say that will explain just how much we will continue in that tradition.

I would like to thank David Opsahl for the interview today. If you have any questions for David or for Novedge, please leave a comment below and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini

Can Oracle Shake the CAD Visualization Market?

Two days ago, on May 15, Oracle (ORCL) announced the acquisition of Agile (AGIL), a company known mostly for its PLM products, for $495 million. I don’t want to discuss the impact of Oracle in the PLM market here. If you're interested you can find more detail at PC World, LinuxWorld, eWeek, Roy Wildeman, Ralph Grabowski's blog, and S. Sadagopan's blog.

What intrigues me is the impact of this acquisition on the CAD visualization market. Agile purchased Cimmetry, the well known CAD visualization company, in February 2005 for $45M cash. And now (through Agile) Oracle owns the AutoVue product line.

Agile is not exactly an example of a successful company. According to Yahoo Finance, they haven't managed to make a profit in the last 3 years. There are also rumors that the Cimmetry acquisition has not been very successful despite the fact that Cimmetry was a fully profitable and established company.

With the appearance of Oracle the landscape of CAD data visualization is changing one more time. It is too early to say what Larry Ellison’s strategy will be, but the main question is: Can a corporation-oriented company such as Oracle foster the end-user product-line of Cimmetry?

The CAD visualization market is going through a series of important changes. With Adobe recently entering this arena with Acrobat 3D, and now Oracle with Cimmetry, I see opportunities and risks on the horizon.

CAD visualization can find the place it deserves on every desktop of every manufacturing company

The main opportunity is for the entire CAD visualization market to mature and reach its potential of millions of users. CAD visualization software can find the place it deserves on every desktop of every manufacturing company. This can generate important business opportunities even for small companies such as Actify.
The risk is that the small software companies will be pushed out of the market by the competition between the two big players. Rivalry between the two giants could drive the prices down to a level that would not be profitable for small software manufacturers.

Franco Folini

Note: Larry Ellison picture is from Gaspar Torriero blog, the composition with AutoVue box is mine.

An Interview with Antonio Pellizzaro of Actify (SpinFire)

Antonio Pellizzaro is the Lead Developer of Actify, the software manufacturer of the SpinFire product line, a group of applications for CAD data visualization and sharing. Actify and Novedge are both located in San Francisco, a few blocks away. I invited Antonio to participate in the following interview:

Can you tell us a bit about yourself and your contribution to the SpinFire product line?
I've been with Actify for 9 years. I had the good fortune to work with the founders [Cristiano Sacchi and Mark Gisi], who first saw the huge market need for design communication software. (Actify is the pioneer of 3D visualization of CAD design to improve communication.) My work ranged a lot through the years, but I mainly focused on the graphics for SpinFire (formerly 3DView) and the importers (software modules to interface SpinFire with all the different formats it supports).

What is the most challenging part in designing and building a CAD visualization software such as SpinFire?

CAD viewers fulfill the need for informal digital communication

I think the challenge is to provide an easy-to-use tool for informal communication for all different types of users. The "consumers" of 3D data are varied, with diverse needs ranging from the basic viewing of a simple part, to the most advance measurement and handling of very complex assemblies. Users want a one-stop solution for all their needs. The ultimate customer need is communication: a good tool must facilitate the communication between users, by allowing the addition of markups, comments, the history of reviews, and data searches. All these are key to a successful CAD visualization software. Another key element is the ability to read files generated by different CAD systems. Users are receiving files from many sources and, as I said before, they want a one-stop solution.
Also, the real challenge all the players in this market will face is the ability to provide a complete solution to the technical data communication problem. CAD visualization is just one aspect of the whole solution: very important, but not enough alone. While PLM (Product Lifecycle Management) systems provide very structured and formal communication, CAD viewers fulfill the need for informal digital communication. There is a big gap between the two and Actify is the only one who provides a solution for people in the middle area. Design Share has been designed to meet the needs of these customers.

From the technical point of view, how do you compare PDF and ".3D", the Actify proprietary file format?

adding 3D (to PDF) is a good idea but... many people will be confused on the use of PDF

In my opinion the main difference is that PDF files can store the exact geometry along with the tessellated data, while the ".3D" files store only the tessellated model. There are definitely a lot of benefits in storing the exact geometry, but, assuming we want to stay in the strictly Visualization area (meaning no advance measurements and no export to other formats) then I don't think it is a good idea. Especially it's not a good idea to provide the functionality to export IGES and STEP. When I think of PDF, I think of a view/print only document. Adding 3D content is a good idea, but the way it is implemented now, it is going away from view only document, and it is opening the road to data translation. I am sure that many people will be confused on the use of PDF. With the ".3D" format users know exactly what is possible to do and what is not; ".3D" is meant to be a visualization and communication format. This is a huge topic, and it may deserve a blog post by itself. There are pros and cons for both sides.

In the last few weeks there has been a lot of talk about Microsoft Windows Vista and how Vista can slow down the performances of 3D intensive programs. Did you experience any problem with SpinFire Professional?
Not at all. We actually experience much better memory management by the OS, especially when dealing with very large assemblies. The only thing to keep in mind when upgrading to Vista, is to upgrade the graphic drivers by downloading them from the graphic card vendor's website. Many users are not familiar with the upgrade process, and many don't even know what graphic card (or chipset) they have.
I would have expected Microsoft to do a better job in providing the most up-to-date drivers at the time of installation or through Windows Updates.

Actify SpinFire can read/import several CAD file formats. Do you have a special software architecture to handle so many file formats?
It was clear from the beginning that being able to visualize files of different formats was key to the success of SpinFire. We developed an architecture that allows us to add new importers without shipping a new version of the software.
This architecture also enables a third party developer to write his own importers to enhance SpinFire capabilities to display other formats.

Do you think the future of CAD data visualization will be heavily based on the new standard file formats like U3D (Universal 3D) or XPS (XML Paper Specification), or will a proprietary file format emerge as dominant?

one (3D) file format will NOT emerge as dominant for all the sectors

3D data is so vastly used, and for so many industries, that one file format will not emerge as dominant for all the sectors. I think we will see dominant file formats for specific industries or specific needs, and it will be a proprietary format. Adobe has the resources to heavily push the PDF/PRC file format, but companies who already standardized on a file format will not change. (I am thinking of JT and our ".3D". It will be interesting to see if Adobe, i.e. TTF, will provide tools to convert JT and ".3D" files into PDF/PRC.)

In your opinion, what will the next generation of CAD data visualization software will look like?
I think that the visualization software are mature enough. I don't think we will see radical changes in the existing software. Viewers helped adopt 3D as way of communicating design, and now, as a result, the real problem is not visualizing the 3D data but managing it along with all the complementary data.
The main area of development will be Collaboration and Finding 3D information. The next generation solution will include a visualization software and other web-based software to help users manage all those electronic designs.

I would like to thank Antonio Pellizzaro for taking the time to speak with me today. All SpinFire products mentioned in this interview are available online from the Novedge website. If you have any questions for Antonio or for Novedge, just leave a comment below, and we will be glad to answer.

Franco Folini