There is an interesting thread over at eng-tips regarding current CAD job trends. The content itself isn’t so groundbreaking, but the recommendation of Indeed.com’s Job Trends tool made it worth the read.
“Finally!” I thought. “Some objective data to prove that Unigraphics is dying!”
I wasn’t disappointed:
You might be asking why I loathe Unigraphics so much. Truth be told, I’ve never used it. But that doesn’t matter.
No, the reason UG rates so high on my suck-o-meter has little to do with the technical merits at all.
I detest UG becuase even though nobody uses it some schools(I’m looking at you RPI) still insist on teaching it for what I can only imagine are political/sponsorship reasons. Since my company (along with the rest of the universe) uses Pro|Engineer and Solidworks, schools like RPI are poisoning an otherwise rock-solid candidate pool for co-ops, interns, and potentially full-time hires.
Truth be told, I probably wouldn’t care so much if the student’s from RPI sucked anyway, but they don’t. I’ve been continually impressed by their attitudes, personality and motivation. It’s a shame that their school is failing to equip their top-notch students with the tools they need.
In any case, i don’t see anything else too amazing besides the decline of UG. Anyone else have any thoughts on the data? Hit up the comments.
Related posts:
by email:
{ 4 comments }
Hi Chris,
I wanted to add a comment to your post.
I'm from Canada, greater region of Montreal.
Also, please forgive any spelling mistakes as i'm french so my spelling may not be top-notch!..:-)
Here in Montreal, NX is taught in some of our top universities.
McGill and UQUAM – Université du Québec à Montréal to name a few.
They also teach SW and SE and… the list goes on…
The fact is, all major CAD softwares target educational establishments as part of their market penetration schemes.
It was the case with autocad, that's why it was so big. Students came out from school fully trained on it. It was obvious to companies to invest in that particular tool as they would employ someone who only has to concentrate on learning the design and process of their line of business.
SW, and NX are doing the same. Most of the time, educational establishments dont have to pay for their licenses. I don't know the percentage on this, but I know that some universities only have to pay for the maintenance on the software. Perhaps, some of them don't even pay maintenance at all…. It's all marketing…
In our part of the world, it's also true that NX is used by most large employers and SW is used by most small to medium businesses.
As someone whos has been fully trained (basic level to advanced levels, freeform etc…) in both SW and NX. I can defenitly tell you that technically and timewise, NX is the better business solution. I cannot talk about CATIA or Pro-E. I only have about a month's worth of experience on it from a loong time ago… CATIA, no experience at all..
When businesses look at a design tool, they tend to look only at the modeling and drafting capabilities perhaps other applications within the tool. But the one thing they cannot notice or interpret is the day to day functions which resort to picks and clicks that make each individual more or less productive for the business.
I've used NX for 6 years in the past and I've been using SW for 3 years now, and till this day, I can assure you, that NX is a better business solution. I roughly estimate that NX has approximately 30% less picks and clicks for the same job to be done. How much time and money does that represent for a business when you can assign a dollar figure per user?
Sure, popularity wise, (Canada is composed of something like 80% small to medium businesses) NX isn't near SW, however, large businesses buy business solutions that give the better ROI short to medium term. While small to medium businesses buy the quick solution without fully investigating and benchmarking the tool they are buying.
I woul appreciate it if you could provide the data sources that render the graph you have displayed. I'd also like to know on what metrics (sales or number of seats?) the graph was generated. I know the CAD software industry often refer to number of seats/users to measure how they are doing.
It would also be very interesting to see your same graph for the Small to medium businesses vs large enterprises.
I ask this because the entire CAD industry knows that an NX licence is more expensive than a SW licence. That alone can influence your graphic and the overall impression of what you display.
I'm a product development professional and we love to analyse statistics and data…:-) We aslo do industrial marketing to identifying opportunities in the market for our clients, so we love the kind of thing you have done here.
So there you go, that was my two cents.
I hope it will make you want to dig deeper and give other readers some insight from an experinced user (17 years in design and development) on both products.
Have fun and Best Regards,
Christian
Laval, QC, Canada
My friends call me “Chris” also…
Hi Chris,
I wanted to add a comment to your post.
I’m from Canada, greater region of Montreal.
Also, please forgive any spelling mistakes as i’m french so my spelling may not be top-notch!..:-)
Here in Montreal, NX is taught in some of our top universities.
McGill and UQUAM – Université du Québec à Montréal to name a few.
They also teach SW and SE and… the list goes on…
The fact is, all major CAD softwares target educational establishments as part of their market penetration schemes.
It was the case with autocad, that’s why it was so big. Students came out from school fully trained on it. It was obvious to companies to invest in that particular tool as they would employ someone who only has to concentrate on learning the design and process of their line of business.
SW, and NX are doing the same. Most of the time, educational establishments dont have to pay for their licenses. I don’t know the percentage on this, but I know that some universities only have to pay for the maintenance on the software. Perhaps, some of them don’t even pay maintenance at all…. It’s all marketing…
In our part of the world, it’s also true that NX is used by most large employers and SW is used by most small to medium businesses.
As someone whos has been fully trained (basic level to advanced levels, freeform etc…) in both SW and NX. I can defenitly tell you that technically and timewise, NX is the better business solution. I cannot talk about CATIA or Pro-E. I only have about a month’s worth of experience on it from a loong time ago… CATIA, no experience at all..
When businesses look at a design tool, they tend to look only at the modeling and drafting capabilities perhaps other applications within the tool. But the one thing they cannot notice or interpret is the day to day functions which resort to picks and clicks that make each individual more or less productive for the business.
I’ve used NX for 6 years in the past and I’ve been using SW for 3 years now, and till this day, I can assure you, that NX is a better business solution. I roughly estimate that NX has approximately 30% less picks and clicks for the same job to be done. How much time and money does that represent for a business when you can assign a dollar figure per user?
Sure, popularity wise, (Canada is composed of something like 80% small to medium businesses) NX isn’t near SW, however, large businesses buy business solutions that give the better ROI short to medium term. While small to medium businesses buy the quick solution without fully investigating and benchmarking the tool they are buying.
I woul appreciate it if you could provide the data sources that render the graph you have displayed. I’d also like to know on what metrics (sales or number of seats?) the graph was generated. I know the CAD software industry often refer to number of seats/users to measure how they are doing.
It would also be very interesting to see your same graph for the Small to medium businesses vs large enterprises.
I ask this because the entire CAD industry knows that an NX licence is more expensive than a SW licence. That alone can influence your graphic and the overall impression of what you display.
I’m a product development professional and we love to analyse statistics and data…:-) We aslo do industrial marketing to identifying opportunities in the market for our clients, so we love the kind of thing you have done here.
So there you go, that was my two cents.
I hope it will make you want to dig deeper and give other readers some insight from an experinced user (17 years in design and development) on both products.
Have fun and Best Regards,
Christian
Laval, QC, Canada
My friends call me “Chris” also…
Chris,
As far as the sources, if you click on the chart it will take you to my source. Also, I should reiterate that I can't pass judgement on the daily usage of NX, as my experience is nill.
I agree with the sentiment that small business are often seduced by the low cost of solidworks, and I would not be surprised if the long term ROI of nx is superior. (i'm a fan of Pro|e myself, which also suffers from a higher cost, higher robustness aproach).
But while i understand that it is all part of marketing, schools allowing themselves to be used as marketing tools for the sake of free software is unforgivable in my eyes, especially when such software proficiency (especially right out of school) is one of the biggest differentiators for students interested in design.
At the very least, schools should provide a breakdown of what kind of companies use what kind of software. I feel genuinely bad when a qualified candidate comes across my desk but has Nx as a tool (all our clients are solidworks and pro|e). Even though he would be a great candidate, there is someone just like him out there who knows the right software, and he has the edge.
It just sucks to feel misled by an institution you pay so much money to…
You say you are a product development professional, are you freelancing or do you work with a firm? I don't see too many firms doing product development AND industrial marketing… sounds interesting.
Chris,
As far as the sources, if you click on the chart it will take you to my source. Also, I should reiterate that I can’t pass judgement on the daily usage of NX, as my experience is nill.
I agree with the sentiment that small business are often seduced by the low cost of solidworks, and I would not be surprised if the long term ROI of nx is superior. (i’m a fan of Pro|e myself, which also suffers from a higher cost, higher robustness aproach).
But while i understand that it is all part of marketing, schools allowing themselves to be used as marketing tools for the sake of free software is unforgivable in my eyes, especially when such software proficiency (especially right out of school) is one of the biggest differentiators for students interested in design.
At the very least, schools should provide a breakdown of what kind of companies use what kind of software. I feel genuinely bad when a qualified candidate comes across my desk but has Nx as a tool (all our clients are solidworks and pro|e). Even though he would be a great candidate, there is someone just like him out there who knows the right software, and he has the edge.
It just sucks to feel misled by an institution you pay so much money to…
You say you are a product development professional, are you freelancing or do you work with a firm? I don’t see too many firms doing product development AND industrial marketing… sounds interesting.
Comments on this entry are closed.