SpaceClaim Reacts to Synchronous Technology

I asked Mike Payne, CEO of SpaceClaim, if he had anything to say on the “breakthrough” Synchronous Technology unveiled by Siemens PLM Solutions today. As it turns out, he did.

“I am very impressed that Chuck and his team have chosen to imitate SpaceClaim. It gives us validation that we are on the right track, and delivering what people want. As you saw in our latest product release we have taken this simplicity even further with our “3D On-Ramp™” approach which combines the simplicity of 3D modeling pioneered by SpaceClaim, with the familiarity of 2D. I am sure that Chuck will imitate this, as well, in the next release of NX, and come up with another great name for this technology.”

As regards to the similarity to SpaceClaim, Mike was of the opinion that “it almost looks like SpaceClaim, even down to the Gizmo!”

I think Siemens has helped add a zero to the price tag on SpaceClaim Corporation.

  • Matt

    A couple of things. First, I don’t think Spaceclaim has delivered after all the initial hype, so Siemens is really riding on coat tails that aren’t going anywhere. The one thing Spaceclaim has done is to raise awareness of the former CoCreate product. Second, the Siemens offering combines direct and parametric modeling, rather than putting all the eggs in one basket. SolidWorks has had most of this functionality for a while now.

  • Matt

    A couple of things. First, I don’t think Spaceclaim has delivered after all the initial hype, so Siemens is really riding on coat tails that aren’t going anywhere. The one thing Spaceclaim has done is to raise awareness of the former CoCreate product. Second, the Siemens offering combines direct and parametric modeling, rather than putting all the eggs in one basket. SolidWorks has had most of this functionality for a while now.

  • jon_banquer

    SolidWorks doesn’t have the same functionality and to claim SolidWorks does have it is naïve beyond belief.

    Mike Payne/SpaceClaim has been right all along about the tools that are really needed by people like myself who work in machining job shops and have to work with lots of non-native data or parts you didn’t design. In a machining job shop you simply don’t have hours to use a low level tool like a roll back bar and go through tons of features one by one trying to figure out what someone’s design intent is. Customers simply don’t want to pay for that. The present machining job shop standard is to take the parametrics/history and toss it in the trash and work with a “dumb” solid.

    The question to be determined is if a mixed parametric and direct modeling approach is needed or just a direct modeling approach. I think both approaches are needed and that it will be years before a parametric approach isn’t needed and direct modeling is powerful enough.

    Jon Banquer
    San Diego, CA

  • jon_banquer

    SolidWorks doesn’t have the same functionality and to claim SolidWorks does have it is naïve beyond belief. Mike Payne/SpaceClaim has been right all along about the tools that are really needed by people like myself who work in machining job shops and have to work with lots of non-native data or parts you didn’t design. In a machining job shop you simply don’t have hours to use a low level tool like a roll back bar and go through tons of features one by one trying to figure out what someone’s design intent is. Customers simply don’t want to pay for that. The present machining job shop standard is to take the parametrics/history and toss it in the trash and work with a “dumb” solid. The question to be determined is if a mixed parametric and direct modeling approach is needed or just a direct modeling approach. I think both approaches are needed and that it will be years before a parametric approach isn’t needed and direct modeling is powerful enough. Jon BanquerSan Diego, CA

  • Anonymous

    A comment about recent developments and management changes at SpaceClaim.

    Payne is no longer CEO. It begs the question was it self-obsession or not being able to deliver the goods that is responsible for this?

  • Anonymous

    A comment about recent developments and management changes at SpaceClaim.Payne is no longer CEO. It begs the question was it self-obsession or not being able to deliver the goods that is responsible for this?

  • Anonymous

    Solid Works the Walmart of CAD software

  • Anonymous

    Solid Works the Walmart of CAD software

  • Anonymous

    Solid Edge…The Cadillac of CAD…

  • Anonymous

    Solid Edge…The Cadillac of CAD…

  • Anonymous

    How many Solid Works users does it take to design a Cadillac? None….Solid Works is incapable of designing one.

  • Anonymous

    How many Solid Works users does it take to design a Cadillac? None….Solid Works is incapable of designing one.

  • SolidSolutionsCorp.com

    Solid Edge has also had the ability to manipulate features from other models for several versions, but nothing like the newly announced modeling from the beginning. Training on this for some users may have been missed and didn’t know it was even there.

    Solid Edge sure will open many doors with the new technology. Training will also take a while for some users. It will be very interesting to see where this goes…

  • Anonymous

    Solidworks and Solidedge both have pros and cons. I have both and depending on what the job requires solidworks has done an outstanding job with 3D content and libraries and edrawings.
    Solidedge has done a really good job with the sheet metal side.
    Both are really good softwares depending on what you need to get done.

  • Anonymous

    Solidworks and Solidedge both have pros and cons. I have both and depending on what the job requires solidworks has done an outstanding job with 3D content and libraries and edrawings. Solidedge has done a really good job with the sheet metal side. Both are really good softwares depending on what you need to get done.

  • Anonymous

    Comparing Synchronous technology and SpaceClaim might prove a bit difficult, but I feel it personally that if SpaceClaim is the pioneer of the Technology than they would be always a step ahead of SIEMENS, though it is great to have both "conventional CAD (Parametric)" & "explicit" technology together, offered by Solidedge, I am worried that the software and even the operator as well might get confused what is when applicable, more over the concern is the software package size, cost, its system requirements,time to learn, speed of delivering results, consistency in results for iterative operations, the file size, loading time for file and model regeneration filures + time. Some technical details delivered by SpaceClaim is that it has capabilities of even remodifying IGES files and Round trip integration (as they mention) with CATIA, Rino, AutoCAD and having collabration with ANSYS and ALGOR as well for CAE. So SolidEdge proves itself best fit for people who don't want to accept the rapid change of market, where as SpaceClaim is best fit for people finding solutions for having a common environment for CAD and CAE.

  • Anonymous

    Comparing Synchronous technology and SpaceClaim might prove a bit difficult, but I feel it personally that if SpaceClaim is the pioneer of the Technology than they would be always a step ahead of SIEMENS, though it is great to have both "conventional CAD (Parametric)" & "explicit" technology together, offered by Solidedge, I am worried that the software and even the operator as well might get confused what is when applicable, more over the concern is the software package size, cost, its system requirements,time to learn, speed of delivering results, consistency in results for iterative operations, the file size, loading time for file and model regeneration filures + time. Some technical details delivered by SpaceClaim is that it has capabilities of even remodifying IGES files and Round trip integration (as they mention) with CATIA, Rino, AutoCAD and having collabration with ANSYS and ALGOR as well for CAE. So SolidEdge proves itself best fit for people who don't want to accept the rapid change of market, where as SpaceClaim is best fit for people finding solutions for having a common environment for CAD and CAE.

  • Anonymous

    Just another example of the CAD industry “leaders” arriving to show 10 years too late. Want your cake and eat it to?, then all you need is IronCAD,case closed.
    When will the cad industry and users start to take a look at IronCAD? This has always fascinated me that a product exists that’s lightyears ahead of anything and yet no one will take to time to evaluate it. Yeah, yeah, I hear it already, they don’t do any marketing, that’s a poor excuse, CAD managers have to flush out the quail, thats part of their job, to find the gems in the ruble.

  • Anonymous

    Just another example of the CAD industry “leaders” arriving to show 10 years too late. Want your cake and eat it to?, then all you need is IronCAD,case closed.When will the cad industry and users start to take a look at IronCAD? This has always fascinated me that a product exists that’s lightyears ahead of anything and yet no one will take to time to evaluate it. Yeah, yeah, I hear it already, they don’t do any marketing, that’s a poor excuse, CAD managers have to flush out the quail, thats part of their job, to find the gems in the ruble.

  • Anonymous

    What about TurboCAD….? What about Alibre?
    Comparisons?

  • Anonymous

    What about TurboCAD….? What about Alibre?Comparisons?

  • SolidSolutionsCorp.com

    Solid Edge has also had the ability to manipulate features from other models for several versions, but nothing like the newly announced modeling from the beginning. Training on this for some users may have been missed and didn't know it was even there.

    Solid Edge sure will open many doors with the new technology. Training will also take a while for some users. It will be very interesting to see where this goes…