SolidWorks V6 Due In 2013

Earlier today in my post titled “SolidWorks World 2012 Expectations” I hoped that SolidWorks would shed some light on SolidWorks V6 announced a couple of years ago. The general session of the first day of SolidWorks World 2012 is currently underway and from the tweets coming out I gather that SolidWorks V6 will be released in 2013.

SolidWorks 2013 will be released as normally planned and I presume the current Parasolid-based code will be continued to be developed for some time. SolidWorks is making it clear that customers will not be forced to migrate to the new V6 platform.

So its finally happening then. Here is a picture of SolidWorks V6 shown at SolidWorks World 2010.

  • Ralphg

    Now we know why it was named “V6,” because it took six years to ship. 

  • Mark_landsaat

    I think the 6 in V6 actually refers to a 2016 release date

  • David Kujan

    The idea that SW will continue parallel development with Parasolid is foolish.
    V6 and the cloud is all about FORCING customers to make the switch.
    CUSTOMERS are NOT asking for V6 so its clear Dassault has its own ideas.
    Yet another market leader shoots itself in the foot and kills the Golden Goose.
    What will happen is everything those warned about when Dassault bought SW.
    Look like Siemens will gain serious market share when V6 hits the streets and all the promises vanish like vaporware.

    • Mark_landsaat

       There’s been a lot of talk about this on various blogs, but I don’t get the “FORCING” part. There’s not a software company in the world that can force me to do anything. I have a working version of SolidWorks that I can use the rest of my life without upgrading if that is what I wanted. And while life goes on like normal working with SWX 2012 I can make a decision on where to go next. None of that has to include SWX. I can switch to whatever I want whenever I want.

      Even a company with a large number of seats can stop paying maintenance, continue to operate as normal and have a migration plan to slowly add more seats of the new choice.

      It’s a multicad world as it is and I’m on my fifth or sixth CAD package since the start of my career and fully expect another 5 or 6 switches to happen before I retire.

      But I don’t believe a CAD company forcing me to do anything is included in those plans.

      • David Kujan

         Don’t be obtuse.
         SW will be forcing those who chose to stay with SW to move into a version of SW that is NOTHING like the current version without any guarantee of interoperability.
        The idea you can just sit back and continue to use an out of date product for more than a very short time is nonsense and shows a complete lack of understanding of the real business world.

        • Mark_landsaat

           Maybe you are right, the future will tell. I used to work for a company that used Pro-E who used to be very forceful. As a result the company switched to SolidWorks because it was a better deal.

          This happened more than 10 years ago, but I really don’t see how there’s any difference today. If companies do not like the new product SolidWorks is about to offer us they will loose market share.

          I’m currently using 4 different CAD products on a daily basis of which SWX is one. Even though I have a complete lack of understanding of the real business world, I have a feeling I will continue to thrive by constantly adapting to a changing CAD environment. It’s worked for the past 15+ years and I it will likely continue to work for me. The future will tell if SolidWorks continues to be a part of that.

          • David Kujan

             Do you have trouble reading and comprehending?

            I clearly stated that IF users chose to stay with SW…

            Most companies are standardizing on a single platform.
            You also miss the point that NO ONE in the SW customer base is asking for anything like V6. IF customers aren’t asking for it, why develop it?
            It is neither evolutionary or evolutionary. It is a solution in search of a problem.

            Dassault is doing this in spite of what their own customers are telling them.

            You can parse it any way you like.
            When your CAD vendor decides on a paradigm shift in its product, regardless of customer input, you as a customer ARE being forced into making a choice you shouldn’t have to make.

          • Stefanie Dieterich

            Well, no one asked for the iPod as well…

          • David Kujan

            Actually, the iPad is the only Apple product that had zero market research.
             Apples and Oranges comparison.
            CAD is not a consumer product.

          • Timboskinz

            David… chill.

          • Stefanie Dieterich

            How comes you think SolidWorks didn´t do any market research? I can assure you they do!

          • David Kujan

             It is obvious that Dassault didn’t do any market research or customer polling to justify this switch in architecture for SW V6. The vast  The overwhelming majority of users are upset with this change. They are NOT infavor of it.

          • Anonymous

            That is doubtful.

    • Guest

      David – that’s not true and you know it – are you a Siemens employee?

  • Ralphg

    It’s true that a software company cannot force you to switch, so long as the software has a perceptual license on your desktop computer.  (Some software must be re-licensed every year, like DraftSight. With software running on the cloud, you lose all control, of course.)

    Rather, market forces are what convince you to make the change, like an upgrade in OS that screws up the CAD software, or your clients increasingly using another file format that you cannot xlate to.

    So, it won’t be whether DS forces you to switch, as much as will the SWV6SW2012 translators (a) be available and (b) work well enough. When I’ve interviewed DS, they insist their Catia V6 does a great job xlating SW files, but I’ve never tested the claim.

    • David Kujan

       As someone who has had to deal with CATIA interoperability ( more accurately their lack thereof ), it’s clear that Dassault has SW migrating to CATIA Lite. Dassault can couch it anyway they like but it is as clear as day that the current SW paradigm has reached End of Life status.
      The lack of a clear and cogent statement from SWW 2012 is illuminating to say the least.

      It sure looks like all the SW maintenance fees went into the new Dassault Palace in Massachusetts.
      The Dilbert Principle is alive and well.

  • Stefanie Dieterich

    Continuing my discussion with David here:
    (I start a new comment here since the colum is getting to small to really read the comments)

    #1 SolidWorks might not have asked “do you want us to change the kernel”, I agree. But they keep on asking things like “what can we do to make your daily business easier?” and “what might your challenges be in 10 years”. Work has to be done, no matter which kernel is underneath the interface.

    #2 SolidWorks has surprised me with great new functionality during the past 15 years. They are pretty innovative and why not trust them to come out as outrider again? (Btw: Remember when SolidWorks first announced CAD for Windows PC back in 1995 or 96? “CAD-Experts” were laughing about them… And today: can you name any major CAD package that is not running under Windows OS?)

    • David Kujan

       They keep asking and then ignoring. Are you honestly going to claim that SW2012 has any significant, customer driven improvement? That’s BS.

      Furthermore, the original SW was a paradigm shift in CAD because people were asking for a PC based solution for CAD. That is a fact.

      V6 is indeed a paradigm shift but it is change for the sake of change. It creates needles interoperability issues but speaks volumes about Dassault’s intent.

      Dassault has shot themselves in the foot and continue to mismanage this as NO ONE actually believes their pronouncements about V6.

      • Mark

        Erm. Feature freeze is in 2012. I think that is a customer driven enhancement.

  • Lrfeldmann

    The only person bullshitting in this whole thread is Mr. Kujan. What is your goal – obviously FUD!

    • David kujan

  • Nice work !

  • Anonymous

    I wonder if they will let existing SW users try it out.  And I mean in a decent long-term uncripplied manner.

    • I’m pretty sure they will. Or they should. If I were them, I would give all paying customers access to the new platform for as long as they want. No point in limiting access when you want people to make the switch.

  • Everything you read on the web about SolidWorks V6 amounts to lots of opinions and guesses on what it will be like.  Until there is a PRODUCT AVAILABLE, it will remain nothing but that.  

    I for one am taking the optimist approach.  I have seen NOTHING to indicate SolidWorks is forcing anyone to do anything.  We’ll see how all this starts to pan out in 2013.  I can assure you all eyes will be on SolidWorks when they roll it out…and they know that more so than anyone.

    Ricky Jordan

  • Beantownjeep

    I’m glad your information comes from someone who is paid by Siemens to blog about Solid Edge. Definitely gives me a clear unbiased opinion.

    • Neil

      Matts SolidEdge exploration blog, clearly identified as being sponsored by Siemens, is quite recent and arises because some SW users including himself and myself have little interest in the direction Dassault are going and are looking to find out about alternatives. The blog is both an opportunity for ex SW users to assess Solidedge and a promotional opportunity for Siemens. So far I have been impressed with their willingness to offer a helpinghand to SW refugees and also to listen to what functionality might be extended for the benefit of a different type of user than they have catered to in the past. Matt sees usefulness in direct edit technology rather than the cloud. Nothing dishonest or mischievous happening there. The ins and outs of SWv6 have all been thrashed out for several years already before this ‘final solution arose. I would describe the situation SW users have been landed with as frustrating and disappointing. The least you can do is correctly characterise Matt as a CAD user with a genuine concern for his profession and fellow users rather than as a shill for Siemens.