« Improving Simulation with test | Main | Who's winning? »

EvanWorks

I'm at SolidWorks World for a few days. 

Last night, I attended the opening reception, held in the exhibit hall.  Some of the products I saw included TopsWorks, BlankWorks, MoldWorks, SplitWorks, DriveWorks, OptisWorks, CircuitWorks, DBWorks, MechWorks, CADWorks, KBEWorks, DezignWorks, SigmundWorks, CAMWorks, CustomWorks, FormatWorks, NEIWorks, ToolWorks, FabWorks and CustomWorks.  And none of these products were even from SolidWorks Corporation!

As amusing as all these products riding on the coattails of the SolidWorks name may be, there is some substance here.  SolidWorks has over 1,000 third-party partners, over a half-million users, over a quarter-billion dollars in revenue, and this week is hosting the largest MCAD conference in the industry, with approximately 3,500 attendees.

Let's put that in perspective -- Autodesk's conference last year attracted 5,000 attendees -- covering the entire spectrum of their product line.  A reasonable guess of the number of Inventor users attending would probably be between 1,000 to 2,000. (I don't believe Autodesk has released the actual number.)

Among the attendees at this year's SolidWorks World are a minimum of four Autodesk employees.  SolidWorks openly allowed them to attend.  I understand that there may be other Autodesk employees attending surreptitiously.

This is rather interesting, because Autodesk prohibits its competitors from attending Autodesk University.  I've personally attended Autodesk University for years, and was a speaker there for a several years.  This last year, despite no change in my employment situation, Autodesk apparently decided I was a competitor, and black-listed me, refusing to admit me, after I'd travelled across the country to the venue, and presented my credit card to pay for my entrance.  What's particularly ironic about this is that Autodesk uses my software technology in its products.

Beyond sending employees to attend a competitor's conference, Autodesk felt it might be a good thing to hold a major press and end-user event across the street, going to far as to even post a person at the entrance to the SolidWorks World Conference (inside the hotel), to direct attendees to its event.

So, how successful was Autodesk?  It was a disaster, so far as I can tell.  On Sunday, they only managed to get about 75 SolidWorks users to come by.  Most of the attendees at SolidWorks World are hardcore users, and are unlikely to switch to Inventor. (In my opinion, the user success story they were highlighting was so simplistic that no experienced SolidWorks user would have been impressed by it.)

I stopped by the Autodesk event today (Monday afternoon.)  In theory, they were having a press event.  The Autodesk rep, Jeremy Schmitz, there told me that they were just doing one-on-one presentations.  Translation: Very few press people came by, so they were just talking to the few to wandered in.

Most of the press and analysts I talked to were surprised that Autodesk would do such a thing, and were quite uninterested in dignifying this stunt by attending.

As for me -- I went because I was curious what insane thought process would cause Autodesk to do this.  Jeremy seemed to be under some mistaken impression that this was business as usual, and that SolidWorks would likely do the same thing.  Jeremy, if you're reading this, pay attention:  SolidWorks has no intention to stoop to this level.  They're an aggressive competitor, and they want to beat Autodesk, but they always compete on the up-and-up.

I'm still trying to figure out what Autodesk gets out of this.  They're unlikely to gain any significant sales from the handful of users they talked to, and they've done nothing to improve their standing among the press and analysts attending SolidWorks World.

As far as I can tell, this was a purely self-congratulatory prank, aimed at showing Autodesk top management how smart the Inventor marketing team is.  Pretty sad.

 

Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 at 04:10PM by Registered CommenterEvan Yares | Comments2 Comments

Reader Comments (2)

SolidWorks always competes on the up and up? That is not true at all and anyone who has followed SolidWork's marketing efforts and published material is able to confirm this. They have consistently claimed seat numbers that are false both in total numbers as well as in the mix of comemrcial to educational. A read of the numbers that are published to support sales of stock, by law, must be correct and they are far lower than the marketing number spins. They employ this tactic against Autodesk, PTC and Solid Edge to name a few.

Additionaly, they historically as well as recently, have published reviews of Inventor functionality - or the supposed lack thereof - which are easily demonstratable as gross misrepresentations and loaded with false statements, not simply negative opiniions on the proposed benefits of their competitor's features. It's often a cutthroat business, as has been observed, but SolidWorks is by no means "above the fray" in fact they typically take the lead in mud slinging. To try to position them as being so much better than Autodesk in the area of marketing tactics is completely bogus.

Evan Replies:
OK... so anyone who has followed SolidWorks marketing knows that they don't compete on the up and up? I guess I'm not anyone. Nor are any of the several editors and analysts who I've asked about this, and who tell me that they respect SolidWorks, and can't think of any examples of the company ever doing anything like Autodesk's recent stunts.

So, that being said, please point me to some examples where SolidWorks has falsified seat counts, or has misrepresented Inventor's capabilities. For that matter, you might point out where SolidWorks has taken the lead in mud-slinging.

Here's the thing -- It really doesn't bother me to be wrong. If I make a mistake, I try to own up to it. And if I'm mistaken in this case, I want to know. Show me.

My sense is that you won't, but I'll be pleasantly surprised if you do.

January 24, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterDM
Agree with the 1st comment. Evan's assessment of SolidWorks being the victim here is a pretty interesting attempt to rewrite history. Whatever about the ill-conceived tactics by AutoDesk at SolidWorks World, I find it interesting to see Solidworks having their own tactics used against them.


Evan Replies:
Actually, I don't think SolidWorks is the victim here. I think SolidWorks comes out looking pretty good. They handled the situation with grace and professionalism.

What I found most egregious about Autodesk's stunt was that they tried to be anonymous. They did up a bunch of literature that looked like it was from SolidWorks (in doing this, they violated 15 USC ยง1125.)

Of course, anonymous stunts are common for some CAD companies. For example, you're from PTC (I looked up your IP address), and felt it was a good idea to do a little anonymous sniping. It's a little low class -- something I would have expected of the old PTC, but not of today's PTC.

(Just so you know, I work closely with PTC as a component software supplier, and to the extent that you provide software tools that help engineers get their jobs done better, I'm an enthusiastic supporter. For example, I think the work PTC is doing with Toyota in powertrain development is pretty impressive, and is a good example of *real* PLM.)
January 24, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterGT

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.