Mar 02 2009

SolidWorks and CADaaS

Several times over the past year or so (most recently in January), I have blogged about the possibility that CAD, or even BIM applications might be delivered on a Software-as-a-Service basis.

Reading Ralph Grabowski’s Upfront Ezine (Issue 592, 17 February 2009), I read his account of SolidWorks World 2009 and the ‘wish-list’ presentation of SolidWorks’ John Hirschtick (video available here – his presentation starts about 15 minutes in, and he starts talking about future trends about six minutes later).

Number two in the list was “Online Applications”. Hirschtick talked about online CAD (mentioning SolidWorks’ Drawing Now and SolidWorks’ experimental Blueprint Now initiatives), saying it had some compelling benefits – this is Ralph’s summary with his comments:

  • No installation time [but there is installation of the underlaying display mechanism, such as Flash or Air].
  • No license codes to enter [but usernames and passwords are required].
  • No upgrades and no backups [because upgrades are automatic, but possibly unwanted].
  • No operating systems to limit distribution [not true].
  • No device drivers [Web browser requires device drivers].
  • PDM [product data management] is automatic, because the data is always in a vault [except when the Internet or the vault provider go down].
  • Collaboration is trivial [true].
  • And a server farm of a 100,000 CPUs available for the heavy lifting.

Personally, I am not too hung up about some of the apparent reservations that Ralph identifies; for example:

  • I already have Flash and Air running on my machine for other applications, so installation of solutions based on these is no problem
  • inputting usernames and passwords before I use an application is just part of my daily routine, and cookies help reduce that requirement
  • the upgrade point is one, in my experience, that can have little impact – some SaaS applications don’t ‘force’ the upgrade (you have a choice of whether you upgrade or not) – and the upgrades are frequently incremental in effect – they don’t require major changes in working practices or additional training
  • Downtime is an issue for every kind of solution. OK, I was affected by last week’s infamous GMail outage, but that was, I think, the first time that GMail hasn’t been available to me. By contrast, it has been been available to me during the occasions that a corporate Microsoft Outlook implementation has crashed – and I have experienced dozens of those over the past 10-15 years.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/03/solidworks-and-cadaas/

Mar 02 2009

Autodesk hit by recession

In Is the Recession hurting AEC IT? last month, I said I would keep an eye on the financial results of some of the key players in the AEC market.

Last week, Autodesk announced its results for the last quarter of 2008: revenues down 18% from the previous year (spread across every operating region; EMEA down 16%, for example), with net income showing a loss of $105.3 million. Forecasts are gloomy, predicting continuation of the downward trend and another loss. Autodesk is already making significant cost reductions, including laying off about 750 people and making a corresponding cut in its San Rafael office space.

There was no specific mention of how Autodesk’s SaaS products, Buzzsaw or Constructware, were faring in the current market conditions.

(At WorldCAD Access, Ralph Grabowski fleshes out the figures a little more here, or you can view a transcript of last week’s conference call.)

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/03/autodesk-hit-by-recession/

Feb 25 2009

Cadalyst saved

Some good news from the publishing world. Further to last week’s post, Testing times for AEC IT magazines, I read in WorldCAD Access and CAD Insider that Cadalyst is now going to be published by a company called Longitude Media, run by Questex’s former Vice-President of Digital Media and General Manager, Design & Engineering Group, Seth Nichols. (See also official Cadalyst announcement)

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/cadalyst-saved/

Feb 23 2009

MJ Medical: not unique

As well as retail, another UK market sector that is helping construction businesses survive the ravages of the current recession is the healthcare sector, buoyed – like education – by government investment.

However, I don’t see the latest entrant to the design collaboration market place as a major player (at least not yet). A news item on the Building website says that MJ Medical‘s Online Stakeholder Update allows clients to amend project data online, using a “unique web-based design tool” to allow clients to amend room design data online (you can also view the 12 February news release on MJ Medical’s irritatingly Flash-powered website).

It claims that room data sheets were previously amended through exchanges of emails, with details stored in spreadsheets, and that its system allows remote user access, reducing the number of meetings.

Looking at such claims from a construction collaboration perspective, remote sharing of design information via the web without email is certainly nothing new. Such platforms can also enable management of standardised design details. However, while these evolved extranets don’t tend to be working at the level of room data-sheets, there are other applications that do. One is ActivePlan (run by former BIW director [and colleague of mine], George Stevenson), which also focuses on health projects alongside retail, offices, education and construction.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/mj-medical-not-unique/

Feb 23 2009

UK retail giant selects ICON

Since the late 1990s when Sainsbury’s paved the way with its landmark decision to pilot use of the BIW platform on a new supermarket in Clapham, UK retailers have been keen adopters and users of construction collaboration platforms, and have probably done more than any other sector to popularise their use. And with retail one of the few UK market sectors that hasn’t been totally savaged by the current construction recession, it remains a key target for the collaboration vendors. Any changes in the sector’s adoption of collaboration are, therefore, potentially significant.

A news release posted on BuildingTalk says retailer Waitrose has selected the SaaS-based ICON System to manage its construction information. It says Waitrose “found their usual information management system was becoming unmanageable and unproductive,” before describing how Waitrose scanned the market to find a data control and integration system which would provide the scope and flexibility it needed.”

I had previously associated ICON mainly with the management of an organisation’s design standards (indeed, it won a retail industry award last year for its work in this area with Waitrose), but now ICON claims it “allows the management of construction information during the three key stages of a building’s lifecycle:

  • The design and specification of buildings.
  • The project roll-out of new builds and refurbishments.
  • The ongoing management of built properties (comprising planning, construction, maintenance and disposal).”

This suggests ICON is now going head-to-head with the established vendors of construction collaboration technology platforms, including 4Projects who also claim Waitrose as a client (was 4Projects “becoming unmanageable and unproductive” or a separate design standards system?).

Update (11 March 2009): Another BuildingTalk news release describes how ICON is working with Asda – a customer of collaboration vendor Sarcophagus.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/uk-retail-giant-selects-icon/

Feb 20 2009

AECbytes writes on collaboration

Just a quick note for those interested in developments in the US collaboration market: AECbytes Lachmi Khemlani has just written about Collaboration, Project Management, and Project Information Management Solutions in AEC. The article looks at Newforma, Attolist and Cadac’s SharePoint-based Organice. Of the three, only Attolist is a genuine Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offering.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/aecbytes-writes-on-collaboration/

Feb 20 2009

Five SaaS myths debunked?

At ITPro, Nicole Kobie writes about Gartner’s warnings to businesses about Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). The IT analysts say firms need to take a good look at the delivery model before jumping aboard the bandwagon, despite the apparent attractions of the model during a recession (Gartner’s views also covered by Brian Tinham at Manufacturing Computer Solutions).

Myth One – SaaS saves money – Gartner said that, because there is no initial capital investment, SaaS deployments are often cheaper in the first two years, but over five years, the total cost of ownership (TCO might outweigh traditional software models.

My response: Much will depend on whether organisations fully account for the people costs involved. I wrote about TCO (SaaS: the business solution) in late 2007, and still think organisations tend to overlook the savings they can achieve by outsourcing application support to the vendor. It is also worth looking at the software upgrade options; with SaaS, the software can be upgraded incrementally incurring little or no user retraining or hardware costs, while upgrading to a new version of an on-premise application may involve new hardware, substantial training and another hefty license fee.

From a construction collaboration technology perspective, it is also worth considering the total costs of alternative approaches to managing such information (say, relying on email, CDs, couriers, etc). If you properly account for the costs of all the different systems and processes employed in running a project using more traditional communications, collaboration solutions nearly always work out cheaper – the paper and postage savings alone used to justify their use. And, again, if you look at the manhours saved in managing information, at the avoided costs of rework, at the avoided disputes, and at the re-use of shared information, the final cost savings can be very substantial indeed.

Myth Two — It’s faster to deploy SaaS – While SaaS is an easier and quicker way to rollout simple systems, that may not hold true for more complex solutions – especially those being customised. Despite vendor promises about 30-day deployments, Gartner say some can take over seven months.

My response: From a construction collaboration technology perspective, SaaS is undoubtedly quicker than rolling out, say, an ERP system. Most of the current collaboration platforms are already extensively focused on supporting typical construction processes and few will require customisation; the sophisticated solutions are extensively configurable and their consultants have years of experience of fine-tuning them to meet different company requirements. The platforms can be quickly implemented, usually within days, and training requirements are low – experienced industry professionals will quickly recognise how the electronic system replicates conventional processes.

Myth Three — SaaS is utility computing – Gartner called this assumption “false in the vast majority of cases”. Most SaaS users are not charged by use, but on a set contract, regardless of whether the software is used or not.

My response: In the context of construction collaboration, ‘SaaS as utility computing’ is something of a myth. Most vendors charge on a per-project basis, regardless of the number of users or volumes of information to be handled. In effect, the customer pays a ‘standing charge’: a fixed monthly subscription allowing the project team unlimited access to the system for the duration of the project.

Myth Four — Integration is difficult – According to Gartner, SaaS can be integrated with office-based apps or data using batch synchronisation, real-time web services or mash-ups – so it’s no excuse not to use software-as-a-service.

My response: Nonsense, as Gartner agrees. The reason construction collaboration platforms became popular was that they offered easy integration with existing applications, both Windows Office tools and software more peculiar to the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) space. Incorporating home-grown or third-party viewer tools, the leading UK project platforms make it easy for construction professionals to publish, share, access, comment upon and mark-up documents and drawings produced by other systems. Moreover, particularly where organisations are looking to integrate their collaboration platforms with back-office systems (eg: building asset registers, project cost management systems, etc), web services interfaces are making integration a breeze.

Myth Five — SaaS is best for basic systems – While Gartner noted that complicated end-to-end systems may not be best served via a SaaS model, the analyst firm said the ability to configure means highly customised applications are possible, especially under application platform as a service (APaas) systems.

My reponse: I agree with Gartner. While it has yet to penetrate the construction collaboration sphere to any great extent (perhaps because it has taken time for the market leaders to emerge), some vendors have begun to offer utilities (some developed by third parties) that augment existing functionality. If this process continues, we may see more sophisticated applications offered by third party developers being integrated into the core offerings of the leading collaboration vendors.

(My thanks to Glyn Jones of Bovis Lend Lease for forwarding the ITPro link)

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/five-saas-myths-debunked/

Feb 19 2009

Out of the blue: LotusLive

About a year ago, I wrote a short post about IBM’s prototype Bluehouse product (see IBM targets SME collaboration with SaaS Bluehouse). Today at Public Service Events’ Construction Project Management ’09 conference at the Bridgewater Hall in Manchester, I had chance to get a quick update on latest iteration of that product from the team at IBM (a conference sponsor); I also shared a conference session with IBM’s Brendan Tutt, the very affable business unit leader for IBM’s portal and social networking products.

Codenamed Bluehouse while in development, it was relaunched as LotusLive Engage last month (see eWeek story, for example) and is a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution which allows users of Lotus Connections to share information with collaborators outside their organisation firewall. It includes a variety of Web 2.0 tools, including user profiles, blogs, Del.icio.us-style bookmarking (‘Dogear’ – thinking drugs jargon, I initially saw this is Do-gear, but it is apparently Dog-ear, as in well-thumbed corner pages!), shared activities, communities and file-sharing plus WebEx-type online meeting and portal tools. I was told the product also has a variety of widgets that allow users to introduce other social media tools such as Flickr and Twitter to the mix (plus tools like LinkedIn, Salesforce.com and Skype).

It is not a product aimed squarely at the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) sector, but where businesses are already employing other elements of the Lotus suite, this may appeal. Its web-meeting capabilities also offer an alternative to the toolset from Kalexo (yesterday’s post).

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/out-of-the-blue-lotuslive/

Feb 18 2009

BIM: All change, please

In presentations and lectures about construction collaboration technologies, I identify building information modelling (BIM) as one of the key forces for change in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry in the next five years. However, many UK professionals don’t seem to grasp just profound a communication change will be brought about by the introduction of BIM-based approaches.

If you are one of these, can I recommend two articles from Cadalyst (underlining this resource’s value to the AEC industry – see post) by Pete Zyskowski:

In particular, I liked his simple distinction, in Pt 1, between BIM and computer-aided drafting:

“BIM is not CAD. BIM was never meant to be CAD. CAD is a replacement for pen and paper, a documentation tool. By comparison, BIM programs are design applications in which the documentation flows from and is a derivative of the process, from schematic design to construction to facility management.”

In the first part, Pete also stresses the importance of communication in BIM:

“We are supposed to be mentoring the next generation, which means that we are going to have to actually talk to each other. … I am always reiterating how much more communication has to happen when working in a BIM workflow, not just between the designers and consultants, but also internally inside the firm.”

He expands this to include communication external to the organisation too, and he ponders more deeply on the implications of BIM for the project team in the second part of the article, incorporating discussion of the AIA’s Integrated Project Delivery documents (see my November 2007 post). Again, Peter is succinct in some of his discussions of the implications of BIM. For example, he echoes a key point of many conversations I’ve had within the Constructing Excellence Collaborative Working Champions regarding early involvement of key parts of the supply chain:

“The communication between architect and consultant … can be summed up in two words: early and often.”

He sums up the challenge:

“BIM is changing … how we think about and handle data requirements. Party lines may be crossed as to who does what and how. But the underlying principle that you need to realize when adopting a BIM workflow is one of communication both internally within your organization and externally with your clients and trade partners. The way that we work together also is changing, one hopes for the better.”

Enter Kalexo

kalexoAlready one VC-backed, California-based company, Kalexo, has launched what it claims is the first Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) platform for the AEC industry: Kalexo Teamwork. According to AECcafe.com, Kalexo CEO Hannes Marais claims the application “seamlessly combines advanced task management with communication tools such as file sharing, online meetings and video chat for a complete software-as-a-service solution.”

Steve Bogart, Kalexo’s VP of Business Development, says tasks are turned into “rich information capsules” that can be securely handed off between project members and organisations: “A task typically has a small team working on it and can contain files, screen shots, movies, voice-mails, checklists, online meetings and recordings, chat logs, status reports and more,” he says (see the demo for more information). And there can be tens of thousands of tasks on a large project.

Marais claims Kalexo offers advantages over exchanging data via email and attachments, and using a myriad of un-integrated tools, saying it is a “single product that utilizes a modern integrated approach at a lower price point”. The product is available for ‘test-drives’ on selected projects with introductory per-project pricing.

In terms of architecture, Kalexo is based on a small desktop application (currently Windows only) installed on each user’s computer that then connects to the company’s servers via the internet, so is not pure Software-as-a-Service (more Software-plus-Services, perhaps). It integrates with common design tools such as AutoCAD and Revit, and with Microsoft Office, Adobe Reader and Acrobat.

As it manages and records information-rich exchanges such as integrated voice, movie communications and online meetings, Kalexo is therefore a step up from most mainstream construction collaboration technology platforms, which have hitherto generally focused on file-sharing and latterly on replicating complete and predominantly paper-based communication processes rather than tasks. It is not, however, a BIM application (instead, Kalexo says “We like to think of ourselves as focusing on the people side of the delivery equation”).

However, its launch will open the eyes of designers and other project team members – and the eyes of rival vendors of conventional construction collaboration technologies – to the potential of multimedia communications which currently are largely managed by separate platforms or applications.

It will be interesting to see whether, and how, they react to Kalexo; will they incorporate more multimedia capabilities alongside their file-sharing and process management functionalities, for example, or perhaps look at breaking down processes into smaller task-based interchanges? Or will the BIM giants look at incorporating similar capabilities into their platforms? It will also be interesting to see how Kalexo fares, being launched in the depths of one of the deepest construction recessions seen in decades.

(Disclosure: Kalexo’s launch was no surprise to me. I had a long telephone conversation about Kalexo in August last year with a prospective US investor, Baseline.)

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/bim-all-change-please/

Feb 16 2009

Testing times for AEC IT magazines?

I spoke at last week’s CIMCIG conference on marketing in the recession. Another speaker, Andy Cassie of CIB Communications, made a few predictions about the construction marketing environment, including a suggestion that one major construction title and one architecture title might disappear (I Twittered about this at the time and it apparently prompted some concern within one or two of the major UK publishing groups with AEC titles).

Late on Friday, thanks to TenLinks.com, I then read that US publisher Questex Media is to abandon Cadalyst magazine, the last US print magazine devoted entirely to CAD (it also has an excellent website – much linked from this blog). It’s reported: “The move by Questex may have been due to the current economic recession and cutbacks in print advertising.”

Frequency of publication was cut back last June, and now Questex is divesting itself of Cadalyst from the end of this month (February 2009). In the meantime, Cadalyst editor-in-chief, Nancy Spurling Johnson, is said to be trying to lead a management buy-out so that they can continue the online resource and potentially resume the print magazine when finances allow.

Impact

I believe Andy’s conference remarks were based on an ongoing analysis of a CIMCIG/CIB survey which showed where construction businesses were likely to be spending their marketing budgets in the near future, and print advertising is certainly one of the areas of decreasing importance.

Doubtless, the recession is already having an impact: most of the main weekly AEC titles in the UK are much thinner these days. Recruitment advertising has dwindled and there are fewer ads for products and services to support editorial content; publishers are increasing spend on online content; and – Andy said last week – online readership is growing at the expense of print readership (he said 25% of Contract Journal‘s readership is of digital copies not print).

Even if the mainstream UK titles survive this savage downturn, one has to wonder if the same could be said for Construction Computing if UK experience follows that in the US. AEC focused Construction Computing, or maybe BTC sister title CAD User, could go the same way as Cadalyst (or perhaps the two might merge properly – recently CC has been an insert stapled into the middle of CAD User).

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/02/testing-times-for-aec-it-magazines/

Load more