A Parachute Option... for Cloud-Data?

When aviation was in its infancy, it was enthralling, and aviation still is for many who are captivated by the thought of flying in the clouds. However in those early years of flight, when things didn't go as planned, mortality was high because parachutes were an afterthought. Today, ICON Aircraft, Inc. has developed a parachute system directly into their A5 model. In business, CEO's and others in the upper echelons of commerce often seal their hiring with a parachute clause. In these situations, the intent of the expression 'parachute' is that when things don't work out as planned, you can come out of the situation relatively unscathed.

ICON Parachute System (IPS); courtesy of ICON Aircraft, Inc.

In a similar sense, cloud-based platforms are fine when things are going business-as-usual, even exciting when everyone is in wow-mode. But what happens when all of that ends? What happens when the visionaries who created the business model decide to leave? What happens when a cloud-based provider no longer wants to be in business, or the company strategy becomes to sell-off to another owner? Is there a data parachute option for users who voluntarily want out, or those who are forced out?

Some might recall that Solidworks was sold to Dassault Systemes in 1997, only two years after its first release in 1995. Could something similar happen to Onshape as it continues its trajectory of success? Also, there have been closings of cloud-based programs before. Remember TeamPlatform for cloud-based design collaboration? It was a noble venture that after being purchased by 3D Systems was thereafter closed. With that in mind, the end of Microsoft eBooks has provided a fresh view of what a very prominent cloud-based platform closing looks like. A fresh reminder that it doesn't matter how many backup servers are dedicated, if it's in the cloud, you really don't own it. Granted there are distinct differences between eBooks and cloud-based CAD programs currently on the market, and even how data rights management (DRM) are handled. However, there are similar principles that demonstrate the real vulnerabilities and risks involved when relying on a program owned / controlled by others.

It's understandable how enticing a cloud-based platform can be for owners and developers. It provides them with 100% total control and real-time analytics on how the program is being used, by whom, when, etc. What company wouldn't want that depth of consumer insight on the use of their products? For example, Onshape is a reputable and well-received platform for CAD and they are no doubt benefiting from this insight as they continue to  develop and mature. Conglomerate Dassault Systemes is trying vigorously to stay relevant with their burgeoning 3DExperience cloud-based platform, evident by how frequently the marketing names for their new products are being revised that their domain admins are struggling to keep up.

It's also understandable that many startups and small lean-mean-business-machines have embraced cloud-based platforms. Why shouldn't they when every day and everybody you work with has a go-for-it, throw caution to the wind and take it on, kind'a day? For startups and small businesses, it's all about risk and seeing what happens!

Onshape is touted as being like a Google Docs for CAD. That analogy seems a very appropriate way to help understand how it works, how data is edited, managed and made accessible to others for collaboration. The striking exception in this analogy however, is there is no off-line mode with Onshape. There is no way to work with Onshape data untethered from the provider. And that seems to be at least one of the aspects of the trepidation felt by so many others regarding cloud-based CAD platforms. Fusion 360 by Autodesk has addressed this need with a hybrid approach, but not everyone wants a full program download nor maintain the hardware needed to operate the program. Add the fact made evident with Microsoft recently closing shop on their eBooks, that local files you thought you owned can and will vanish if a provider implements DRM tactics. Hence the reluctance by many to embrace cloud-based CAD. Users simply don't have control over their cloud-data in a tangible way that feels akin to ownership.

In our complex and dynamic world, it's no surprise that technology, companies, and programs are ever changing, being improved, or phased out. The surprise is when it affects us personally. So it's easy to understand that dependency on a cloud-based CAD platform or provider should warrant a user to question how to recover should the service abruptly end or fail to meet expectations.

Some might argue that there is dependency in every aspect of computing and that is true when talking about computer or server operating systems, programs, devices and the like. The difference is there is still a measure of autonomy with such systems. When product support ends, the user still has general control of their data, of when they want to phase out and trade up or convert. When a cloud platform ends, there is little to no control for the user. In such cases, any action plan and timing is inextricably defined by the owner of the platform.

To borrow the cliche, "it's not if but when" your CAD provider changes their business-as-usual approach. It could be tomorrow, it could be next year, or in five years. Honorable intentions aside, when change comes from your CAD platform, and it will, what data parachute options will you have? While it remains to be seen, based upon current technologies, the better cloud-based CAD provider will include the self-sufficiency of off-line mode for assurance and access to data, AND they will be prudent enough to include a data parachute. In other words, providing users upfront with the means to access their data using a simple export engine, and / or the means to translate data into another format if you want, when you want, independent of the platforms own existence. Perhaps through a consortium approach that can rightfully address the current risks to cloud-data. [Update: At present, Onshape is setting a leading example in addressing the concern of cloud-data accessibility. As noted in their privacy overview, they provide export of design data into any of several industry standard or proprietary formats. Notably, they also provide a full, free API that let's you access all of your data programmatically. Thus enabling you to get your data into, and out of, Onshape at any time. Adding, their philosophy is that by making it possible for you to leave at any time, they're forever motivated to improve their service so that you'll want to stay.] 

As beautiful as the clouds may be on a bright sunny day, how confident would you really be to fly with a provider that sells itself as reputable and reliable, yet purposefully neglects to provide you with a pre-flight safety plan in the event you encounter the unexpected? So, with a cloud-based platform entrusted with your data, wouldn't you expect to have a parachute option?

TeamPlatform... real design collaboration

There was a time when exchanging files through email and ftp sites defined collaboration.  That no longer is the case. TeamPlatform has redefined the new norm for design collaboration with an impressively functional and secure web service! 

(c) VisPower Technology, Inc

Design firms and individuals providing CAD design services will certainly find TeamPlatform worth looking into.  Among the three web-based plans that are offered, the Personal membership is cost free thereby providing a great incentive for potential users to take that next step in genuine collaboration.  In doing so, VisPower Technology, Inc has commendably demonstrated they are sincere in encouraging interest and confidence in their service.  Two additional plans are tiered for Team and Enterprise use and both of these are reasonably priced.  All plans allow for unlimited free Guests.

A brief review of just some of the notable features of TeamPlatform include:

• A dashboard, interface, file sharing and management that reveals a refreshing and clean sensibility

• Superb viewers for both 2D and 3D, along with intuitive markup capability

• Version control with history, task and workspace management that speaks 'this is real collaboration'

• Many of the file management features are made with the Solidworks user in mind

• Mobile compatibility that ensures the benefits of TeamPlatform will extend well beyond the desk   

Sure, bouncing project files back and forth by email can be exciting, especially so when you're not sure which version you may be looking at!  But for any who want to collaborate in the truest sense of the word, TeamPlatform has just what real design collaborators are looking for!

In an upcoming post we will look at the potential of using TeamPlatform as a longterm CAD vault.

Latest & Greatest? ...When to start running the latest SolidWorks CAD release

The anticipation of a new release of SolidWorks typically carries a measure of excitement! After all, we have become accustomed to seeing recognized design and software needs addressed or improved upon. As SolidWorks users, we certainly appreciate the efforts expended toward such development and the benefits that each new release brings. But this also means that each year we are faced with the question of when to start running (a.k.a. committing to) the newly released version. While some individuals or companies have a prearranged plan or standard, others simply wing-it as it were, and hope there will be no repercussions.

There are a number of factors involved which should be weighed in the decision of committing to running the new release. These should include awareness of:

• significant user interface differences
• limitations of version compatibility
• necessity of service pack upgrades
• file collaboration
• PDM integration

As with anything new, the more information we have in advance, the better our decision making capability should be. This is certainly true regarding the above points as well. It is therefore prudent that one would take advantage of any opportunities to learn as much as possible about the newest release prior to determining when to make the commitment. Most VARS (value-added resellers) of SolidWorks will annually hold a 'premiere' event to showcase the newest version and highlight the main aspects that will interest and impact users. By all means attend, if possible. It is probably the most time effective means of seeing the new features and software in action, and the most cost effective as well, since the event is free.
User Interface Differences
These differences should be almost self-evident. Because interface upgrades are intended to make the user-experience more efficient and effective, they are probably the most eagerly anticipated aspect of the new release. The only concern should be the learning curve involved. Regular users will most likely catch on quickly, but bear in mind that significant interface differences will mean your work will take a little longer until becoming accustomed to the new methods, icons, shortcuts, etc.
Version Compatibility
This is simply an awareness issue, especially for novice users, but is vital knowledge in determining what version to use in creating new files and when to commit to running the newest version. SolidWorks files are not backwards compatible. In other words, you can save an older file version into a newer version format, but you cannot do the reverse such as saving a newer version into an earlier version format. Yes, once a file is in the latest version, there is no going back with the exception of completely redoing your design in the earlier version.
Service Pack Upgrades
This too is an awareness issue. No matter how enthralled you or anyone feels about the newest released version, remember that it is not perfect! It will require necessary upgrades to work properly. This has been evident year after year, and really goes with the territory that SolidWorks lives in. The constraints of having to release a new version each year (read 365 days) limits how thoroughly the alpha and beta versions have been properly tested. Therefore, some choose to exercise patience by waiting until a number of service pack upgrades have been released before committing.
File Collaboration
If you are working in collaboration and sharing files with another, then this will be a major concern and most likely one of the main limiting factors in the decision to commit. Ironically, however, it may also have bearing on the impetus of when to commit. It is directly related to version compatibility, but additionally brings in the factors of other designers, toolers, or manufacturers that you may be working with. Typically, whomever in the design chain implements the newest release causes the others to commit. If your design chain goes in one direction, it may not be such a concern, but if your design chain tends to flow in both directions, then there may be issues. While it is not necessarily a negative, it is important that the commitment be communicated and agreed upon, or else one could run the risk of introducing a delay in the development process that could easily have been avoided.
PDM Integration
This should only be a concern for those who manage their CAD in vaulted PDM systems, or work in collaboration with those who do. Non-SolidWorks PDM systems can be intensive and expensive operations for a company and carry compatibility issues such as Viewers, which allow others in the PDM network to view a CAD file without necessarily having the CAD software. In this type of scenario, the PDM system may exert a large measure of influence on when, and even whether one commits to newer releases. If you are working in collaboration with a company that uses a non-solidworks PDM system, ask what SolidWorks version they are using before assuming they are running the latest. Note that some large companies have been known to be actively running SolidWorks versions that are at least 2 years old simply because of the restrictions placed by their PDM system and the expensive upgrades that are involved in keeping up with corresponding CAD releases.
In summary, by being cognizant of the above issues and weighing their relevance, the decision as to when to commit to running in a new release may become self-evident. That being said, some have determined that a specific calendar date, extended some months after the initial new release, is well suited on which to coordinate committing to running the latest release. Others may choose to be flexible, for example by waiting for a specific service pack upgrade (i.e.: 2.0). As with many business issues, communication and awareness will always be the most valuable aspects in the coordinated decision to commit to running the latest released SolidWorks version.