Endesin Corporation


"Engineers aren't boring people, we just get really excited over boring things." -Anon


Contact Me For More Information

Shane Marcheson
Sales Engineer
Phone: 716-805-3323
Mobile: 716-572-9291

Synchronous Technology
What if any impact do you think Synchronous Technology would have on your current design and manufacturing process?
I think it would be transformative, it's a game changer.
I think it would be a cool tool, and it would probably speed up certain processes for us.
I don't think it would have any impact on how quickly or easily we design/manufacture.
I think learning a new way of modeling would slow us down.
I really don't know enough about synchronous technology to have an opinion.
Works Abandons Parasolid
Were you aware that SolidWorks is moving from the Parasolid Kernel?
Yes - and I am worried about that transition
Yes - but I am sure it will be fine
No - I had no idea
TECHfest in Meadville
May 12, 2010


Enter your email address in the box below to receive an email each time we post a new issue of our newsletter:

Add Remove

SolidWorks to abandon Parasolid Kernel !?!

Here is an excerpt from an interview with SolidWorks CEO Jeff Ray at SolidWorks World 2010.

Deelip: After the direct modeling demo you mentioned that your development team received help from Dassault Systemes. Does this mean that the new stuff that you have been working on uses the V6 technology from Dassault Systemes? I ask because I am curious to know whether SolidWorks will be moving away from the Parasolid modeling kernel.

Jeff: What happens under the hood does not really matter to the customer. A SolidWorks user is really not bothered about which modeling kernel we use. We let the user worry about solving his problems and we worry about how we can help him do it.

I am not sure how you feel, but our engineers do happen to care "what happens under the hood", especially when it comes to data migration. Here is another tid-bit I found interesting.

Deelip: I found the Direct Modeling particularly interesting because all along you have maintained that SolidWorks would not have it and now suddenly we see this.

Jeff: I still say that Direct Modeling is not the right approach. Our competition is forcing their customers to choose between one method or the other. Furthermore, they say that if you select one method, you lose the history and features. If you choose the other, then you cannot push and pull stuff around. That is not the right way to go about doing it. I donít know what you want to call this and frankly, it does not matter. As far as I am concerned users simply want to use different methods to model depending on what they are doing. We are simply giving him the tools to do that.

There are a couple of humorous things to note here. One, he doesn't think direct modeling is the right approach, yet his company is investing millions of dollars to develop this technology and "catch up". Two - his comments are directed at Synchronous Technology, and they couldn't be more false. We do not force anyone to do one thing or the other; we do not throw away your history and features. We simply allow you to use the best of the two distinct methods, history based constrained modeling and explicate modeling, at the same time. I wonder if his tune will change in a few years when Works finally catches up and has anything that really competes with Synchronous Technology.

Your company can stay with the Parasolid kernel. You can avoid being part of this experiment. You can maintain your legacy data, open it directly without any migration tools and edit it faster and easier than you could in Works with Synchronous Technology.

The time to look into Solid Edge with Synchronous Technology is now, let us show you why this is the right move for your business.

Published by Shane Marcheson
Copyright © 2010 Endesin Corporation. All rights reserved.
Powered by IMN