What's behind SpaceClaim? An interview with Howie Markson

Hi everybody, I've read a few discussions in this newsgroup about SpaceClaim. I just finished an interview with Howie Markson, Senior Director of Marketing
of SpaceClaim. I asked Howie several specific questions, trying to understand how different this is from other CAD systems (such as SolidWorks). If you are interested in knowing more about this product and the company behind it, this can be a good source of information.
The complete interview is available on the Novedge blog:
http://blog.novedge.com/2007/06/an_interview_wi_1.html
Let me know your opinion about the interview and mostly about the software.
Franco Folini
P.S. I do not sell SpaceClaim or related products.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
After reading this and seeing once again the involvement of Mike Payne we have to ask a few questions. For example, one of the claims Space Claim makes is that they are much faster than parametric modelers on the big stuff. I have no doubt that they are. You have to wonder if Mike Payne has realized this all along and by implication the SW folks. Is this interview an admission that the parametric modelers really have an upper limit on model size and that that limit lies within the boundaries of ordinary everyday practical problems?

the interview was the fact that most of the parametric information we build into models doesn't get used. For example, the lightweight state in an assembly is really just turned off parametrics. So are locked in- context relations. So is the fact that SW doesn't naturally solve all the way down through an assembly when rebuilding. What they seem to be saying in the interview is that they are using something similar to parametric relations to help build geometry and then taking it out of the picture once it is built. This is kind of the way most of us work.
It would be interesting to see the list of licenses in the help/about menu for Space Claim. I would suspect one of the usual geometry kernels like parasolid or acis. What else is in there? Inquiring minds would like to know.
TOP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TOP, IMHO, your description of SpaceClaim is too much SolidWorks centric. It's like describing a motorbike as a car with only two wheels. I'm not the best person to talk about specific details of SpaceClaim. I hope to have soon the opportunity to play with their system in order to get a more direct, first hand experience.
Regarding the modeling engine, according to the news, SpaceClaim uses ACIS. IMHO, it would not make much a difference for the end user if they were using Parasolid. It seems that they are not using d-cubed (the constraint manager). D-cubed page doesn't list SpaceClaim as a customer. This leave space for a few options, including in-house made constraint manager. I'm not a SpaceClaim person and, like you, I don't know the answers.
Franco
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Franco,
Can't imagine why I would try to think in SW centric terms in this forum. :) Until I can try it I have to think in terms of what I have already used/seen and what others here have seen. I suppose I could have spoken of it in Rhino centric terms also as Rhino excels at modifying imported geometry as well as it's own. Or UG centric terms as UG has some very good tools for working with imported geometry and even for making it parametric if necessary. SpaceClaim is just a word. It doesn't really suggest anything to me like SolidWorks or AutoCad or Unigraphics or Parametric Technology. And yet it isn't quite like Rhino, Anvil, Catia, Revit or WindChill either. The only thing I think I really understand clearly about it is the claim it would have on the space in my wallet and that is a negative.
The thing I had going for me when I first looked at SolidWorks is that I had recently taken Pro/E training so I understood parametric modeling a bit. SolidWorks just made it very easy, addressed the file size and bug problems I was having with another software and was affordable. I don't have any reference frame for Space Claim nor do most people IMHO. That is what they have to get across to the peeps. What does Space Claim have that nobody else has and what will that do for me?
So when they have a 3D modeling challenge between SpaceClaim and SolidWorks on a 5,000 part assembly with some real world factors thrown in I may start to understand why I should even listen to these guys.
TOP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TOP wrote:

I think it's saying out loud what everyone has known all along, that parametric modelers carry a lot of baggage with them in the form of history that direct editors don't. I can easily believe that they are faster, since there is no history, constraints or parametric relationships to rebuild.

Maybe, but I think the "algorhithms" they talk about are only activated when you try to edit something. Geometry is geometry. Parasolid is as good as IGES or SW native or ACIS or whatever. It seems to have some sort of a "feature recognition" thing going on to help it edit.
The licensing is only problematic if you don't consider this: Think of it as the same price as SolidWorks maintenance, but without the upfront purchase price. The overwhelming majority (90%+) of new SW customers buy subscription, AND they pay the $3995 or whatever. Spaceclaim customers will only pay the subscription costs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.