The CAD Insider

The New York Times Discovers Generative Design

Generative design, the overhyped and ultimately disappointing technology, one that was to have computers design perfect part, may have finally been discovered by the popular media – but only because it is being grouped under the public’s latest shiny object: AI.

In “35 Ways Real People are Using A.I. Right Now,” the 5^th real person is a NASA research engineer who has used a generative design program to make the lightweighted part for a satellite. Which generative design software we will never know, because the  venerable publication succumbing to the fever over the hottest tech story in years (ChatGPT and AI) attributes the design to AI.  Not once is “generative design” or “topology optimization” used in their article.

It’s not like the Times doesn’t cover technology. They have a Technology section. The paper’s Wirecutter reviews of tech products are great plain-English information that can boil an ocean of products into one or two recommendations.  To be fair, they did cover generative design 2 years ago -- though it was only for its novel use in jewelry design.

Should we even expect the popular media, even the best, to go deep into technology? The Wall Street Journal, does a commendable job on the business side of tech, even brushing on the science. 

I shouldn’t complain. The lack of depth in real technology coverage is an opportunity -- and job security -- for tech journalists.

It’s Easy to Use if You Know How to Use It—The UI Change Dilemma

An overhaul of the user interface is necessary after some time but poses a dilemma for every software company. Just as a home could use a fresh coat of paint to avoid a tired, dated look, so could software apps. Every software company knows but puts off big UI changes because that is a)expensive and b)could cause a riot.

AutoCAD users practically rioted when Autodesk changed their command line driven UI and took away their shortcut-filled tablets of a DOS-based system to a mouse-driven interface that matched the Windows look and feel. SolidWorks users grumbled a little. Heard was “don’t you guys have anything better to do? Like fix the crashes?” But having grown up on Windows, they didn't riot.  The SolidWorks UI team was able to get away with modernizing the UI with better icons, less clutter, etc. Let's face it. SolidWorks had grown to do so much that rows and columns of icons crowded the screen and turned their working area into a peephole. None of the functionality was lost with the UI changes but it still took a little getting used to. Users were annoyed to have to hunt for their favorite tools.

PTC faced huge changes going from minicomputers like the DEC VAX to the PC and from Pro/ENGINEER to Creo. But it all seemed to be contained. I did not hear of Pro/E users leaving the flock in droves.

A UI refresh is a huge undertaking. But when announcing it, one has to be careful. You may want to blare the trumpets and reveal the results of the massive undertaking, so proud are you, but then you have all the users who have gotten  by now, are quite used to your software the way it was.

Don’t even think of telling the users that the new UI will make the software easier to use. For the users who knew how to use it, anything new will be harder to use.

Volume Graphics, makers of VG Studio, a CT scan processing application, has chosen to release their UI update (read about it here on engineering.com). Although it has a radically different marching menu, the change comes with version 2023.1,  a point release. It’s a genius approach. It will look as if the company is saying the UI change is no big deal, nothing to be scared off, not like a big annual release -- while still having a thoroughly modern look in their current release.

For whom a fresh coat of paint is important, i.e., new homeowners, the clean new look means everything. This house may be old (that’s good, it’s built to last) but look how well it’s been kept up.

And this Month the PLM Leader is… Siemens

Siemens is busy congratulating themselves on Twitter for being the leader in PLM, citing a Data Quadrant by Software Reviews that placed them far and away better than their competition in terms of “product features and satisfaction” and “vendor experience and capabilities.” Far ahead of Dassault Systèmes’ ENOVIA,  Autodesk (though Fusion 360 is not a PLM product), Arena (SaaS PLM acquired by PTC) and even further ahead from PTC's Windchill.

Only late last year, PTC CEO Jim Heppelmann joyfully discovered his company was the the PLM market leader after combining the number of users of Arena and Windchill.

Not much is known about SoftwareReviews. Are they yet another algorithmically judgmental all-purpose social media scraper of comments from which product quality is somehow derived? Are they legit, basing their result on the collective considered reviews of bona fide PLM users, or industry experts (like Gartner with their Magic Quadrant) or – perish the thought—journalists?

Another review site, G2 reviews, has been used by so called winners as proof of their superiority. G2 also has their own quadrant for PLM and also has a Siemens Teamcenter as a leader in "market presence" but practically even with Arena PLM in "satisfaction."