4 ms·

FreeCAD is great because it's free as in freedom. The technical weak point that will always hold it back is the kernel, Open CASCADE, when compared with Paraso

FreeCAD is great because it's free as in freedom. The technical weak point that will always hold it back is the kernel, Open CASCADE, when compared with Parasolid, which powers OnShape. Parasolid is in effect subsidized by the Industrial-Military complex. It was started in 1987 - around 20 developers then. [1] I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2] Disclaimer: Parasolid dev 1989-1995. [1] That doesn't include customer support etc - IIRC department headcount was over 40. [2] To quote GrabCAD founder Hardi Meybaum in his Kindle ebook The Art of Product Design: "Although Siemens is a public company the PLM division is such a small part of its total business that very little financial information specific to the PLM division is released."

nickpsecurity 9y ago
"I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2]" You make it sound like a bad thing when it's actually a solution. What you in effect said was there is a pile of money in defense contracts that can be used to subsidize development of FOSS tools. Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). Whoever was trying to make FOSS CAD happen didn't do this and still isn't. If they want high-quality CAD, they need to figure out how to get defense sector funding paid, skilled programmers to build the hardest parts with easy extensions by volunteering contributors. I've seen enough people in defense sector griping online about low-quality CAD tools they have that there's certainly demand. Probably just needs to be priced much lower than a lot of the others.
- delhanty 9y ago
  I strongly agree with all that. In fact, being FOSS could be a huge advantage. The #2 kernel ACIS by Spatial is massively held back by albatross round its neck - ie. the parent company Dassault who have foisted there own IMO inferior kernel CGM on them in the bizarre belief that it is a technical marvel. Dassault is also the albatross round the neck of another subsidiary: SOLIDWORKS [1], and is famous for the $6.18 billion cost overrun when Airbus transitioned the A380 from the Catia V4 kernel to the Catia V5 kernel, which is essentially CGM. [2] My point was that it is very difficult for OpenCASCADE with its setup to compete with 450 person-years of core dev work on essentially $0 funding. [1] "One of the non-technical issues with CGM will probably be licensing costs. DS (and, hence, Spatial) is “proud” of CGM, and will be pricing it higher than ACIS." http://www.3dcadworld.com/spatial-acis-cgm-and-the-future-of-geometric-modeling-kernels/ http://www.3dcadworld.com/spatial-acis-cgm-and-the-future-of... [2] http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=4700 http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=4700
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    Good points. Sad that the potential of the others were wasted to that degree, too.
    - delhanty 9y ago
      Yeah - sad! IMO that's the reason that OnShape exists at all though - the rockstar team that founded Solidworks finally got fed up with Dassault and decided to write Solidworks for the cloud. ShapeManager by Autodesk is probably the technical #2, and is doing well. You can't buy it easily though. It powers Inventor/Fusion360 and is also in Revit and AutoCAD.
      - nickpsecurity 9y ago
        "the rockstar team that founded Solidworks finally got fed up with Dassault and decided to write Solidworks for the cloud." The hacker spirit in action. Roll up one's sleeves, write some code, and give a big FU to the establishment. :)
- delhanty 9y ago
  Some more idle thoughts [1] refining what I wrote elsewhere on this thread: FreeCAD Arch is a smart pivot: they just need to do a hard fork from the rest of FreeCAD and replace Open CASCADE with CGAL. History based parametric MCAD is hugely resource intensive and the 800lb gorilla SOLIDWORKS is formidable. Best idea stay away! If that doesn't put you off: (1) replace history based with direct modeling (2) have a single curved surface type of G1 (and approx G2) sheets of some closed set of implicit quartic surfaces - e.g. Dupin Cyclides or some appropriate generalization. Get very good at intersecting these! [1] I've exited all 3D. Even the areas with dynamic markets, such as 3D-printing and augmented reality, are oversupplied with talent.
- delhanty 9y ago
  >Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). I've heard of Galois Inc. Isn't that where Don Stewart one of the RWH authors worked for a while? Looking a the Galois team on their webpage he doesn't seem to be there now. There seems to be far more opportunity in crypto related stuff than anything CAD right now. It's a matter of opinion whether any particular crypto currency is a bubble but in the long term, blockchain technology isn't going to just go away and that surely must disrupt markets for years to come. So, even though I know a lot more about CAD, I've actually just started working on my own AGPL3 crypto toolkit in a private GitHub repository in the hope that I can build a consultancy business around it and maybe do the dual-licensing thing.
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    Idk about Stewart or their people: just look at their projects like the Haskell VM, Cryptol, and Ivory language. Far as crypto, there's currently a rush or bubble on blockchains. Definitely a chance for you to make money on the hype. There's also a lot of competition (noise). That will undermine you a bit. Good luck.

nickpsecurity 9y ago

"I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2]" You make it sound like a bad thing when it's actually a solution. What you in effect said was there is a pile of money in defense contracts that can be used to subsidize development of FOSS tools. Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). Whoever was trying to make FOSS CAD happen didn't do this and still isn't. If they want high-quality CAD, they need to figure out how to get defense sector funding paid, skilled programmers to build the hardest parts with easy extensions by volunteering contributors. I've seen enough people in defense sector griping online about low-quality CAD tools they have that there's certainly demand. Probably just needs to be priced much lower than a lot of the others.

delhanty 9y ago
I strongly agree with all that. In fact, being FOSS could be a huge advantage. The #2 kernel ACIS by Spatial is massively held back by albatross round its neck - ie. the parent company Dassault who have foisted there own IMO inferior kernel CGM on them in the bizarre belief that it is a technical marvel. Dassault is also the albatross round the neck of another subsidiary: SOLIDWORKS [1], and is famous for the $6.18 billion cost overrun when Airbus transitioned the A380 from the Catia V4 kernel to the Catia V5 kernel, which is essentially CGM. [2] My point was that it is very difficult for OpenCASCADE with its setup to compete with 450 person-years of core dev work on essentially $0 funding. [1] "One of the non-technical issues with CGM will probably be licensing costs. DS (and, hence, Spatial) is “proud” of CGM, and will be pricing it higher than ACIS." http://www.3dcadworld.com/spatial-acis-cgm-and-the-future-of-geometric-modeling-kernels/ http://www.3dcadworld.com/spatial-acis-cgm-and-the-future-of... [2] http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=4700 http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=4700
- nickpsecurity 9y ago
  Good points. Sad that the potential of the others were wasted to that degree, too.
  - delhanty 9y ago
    Yeah - sad! IMO that's the reason that OnShape exists at all though - the rockstar team that founded Solidworks finally got fed up with Dassault and decided to write Solidworks for the cloud. ShapeManager by Autodesk is probably the technical #2, and is doing well. You can't buy it easily though. It powers Inventor/Fusion360 and is also in Revit and AutoCAD.
    - nickpsecurity 9y ago
      "the rockstar team that founded Solidworks finally got fed up with Dassault and decided to write Solidworks for the cloud." The hacker spirit in action. Roll up one's sleeves, write some code, and give a big FU to the establishment. :)
delhanty 9y ago
Some more idle thoughts [1] refining what I wrote elsewhere on this thread: FreeCAD Arch is a smart pivot: they just need to do a hard fork from the rest of FreeCAD and replace Open CASCADE with CGAL. History based parametric MCAD is hugely resource intensive and the 800lb gorilla SOLIDWORKS is formidable. Best idea stay away! If that doesn't put you off: (1) replace history based with direct modeling (2) have a single curved surface type of G1 (and approx G2) sheets of some closed set of implicit quartic surfaces - e.g. Dupin Cyclides or some appropriate generalization. Get very good at intersecting these! [1] I've exited all 3D. Even the areas with dynamic markets, such as 3D-printing and augmented reality, are oversupplied with talent.
delhanty 9y ago
>Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). I've heard of Galois Inc. Isn't that where Don Stewart one of the RWH authors worked for a while? Looking a the Galois team on their webpage he doesn't seem to be there now. There seems to be far more opportunity in crypto related stuff than anything CAD right now. It's a matter of opinion whether any particular crypto currency is a bubble but in the long term, blockchain technology isn't going to just go away and that surely must disrupt markets for years to come. So, even though I know a lot more about CAD, I've actually just started working on my own AGPL3 crypto toolkit in a private GitHub repository in the hope that I can build a consultancy business around it and maybe do the dual-licensing thing.
- nickpsecurity 9y ago
  Idk about Stewart or their people: just look at their projects like the Haskell VM, Cryptol, and Ivory language. Far as crypto, there's currently a rush or bubble on blockchains. Definitely a chance for you to make money on the hype. There's also a lot of competition (noise). That will undermine you a bit. Good luck.