My recent post about top pros and cons to have a special CAD file sharing tools drove some interesting conversation and controversy from Hardi Meybaum of GrabCAD. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you can start here – Why using Dropbox, Github or Box for CAD sharing is a mistake, then go here – Top 3 pros and cons to have a special CAD file sharing tool and finally here – Debunking the cons to CAD file sharing tools. Hardi brings up the discussion about integration and invited me to speak about it in his twitter message: Look forward to hear your perspective about integration RT @olegshilovitsky: Interesting conversation about CAD files sharing with GrabCAD
Look forward to hear your perspective about integration RT @olegshilovitsky: Interesting conversation about CAD files sharing with GrabCAD
— Hardi Meybaum (@hardi_meybaum) October 9, 2013
Integration is a very loaded word when it comes to an enterprise organization. Back in 2009, I identified integration as The Biggest PLM challenge on the cloud . Debates about challenges of enterprise integrations are going well beyond the point of CAD File Sharing tools. Navigate here to read more – PLM and Enterprise Integration Game and PLM Integration Failures. However, let me get back to the CAD Files Sharing.
Why Integration is an issue for CAD files sharing?
I can see three main reasons why integration can become an issue for CAD File Sharing – CAD licenses, mobile devices and web access and publishing process. Let me speak about each of them separately.
1. CAD licenses. You don’t want to buy an extra CAD tool to view files. You expect special CAD Files Sharing tool to solve this problem. It is actually goes back to #1 benefit of special CAD file sharing tools – viewers. In the world of expensive CAD licenses it can be an issue and big benefit.
2. Mobile Devices. In a modern world, you don’t really want to be at your desk to get an access to CAD files you are sharing. You want to leverage mobile devices to get access to shared files. This problem cannot be solved by “just providing an access to the file” using generic tools like Dropbox, but need to have a special mobile application to view files. CAD vendors are providing their own apps, but you always can expect something better.
3. Publishing process. Even you consider to use generic cloud file sharing tools like Dropbox and/or others, you might face a problem of how to publish right files. The strategy to publish a whole working directory can be not an option for different reasons (for example security). The nature of CAD files to have lots of dependent files. Even simple AutoCAD file might have dependencies on XRefs. Advanced 3D modeling tools such as Autodesk Inventor, SolidWorks, and others are usually tend to provide a special tools to get CAD assembly or project extracted from the context and places in a separate place.
Complexity of CAD data integration
Traditionally CAD vendors were very protective with regards to other vendors and developers accessing proprietary CAD formats and libraries. If you are not a novice person in CAD business, I’m sure you pretty aware about that. You need to use sophisticated APIs in order to get data access as well as extract relevant information that can help you to publish right data online.
Integration beyond CAD Files publishing
Hardi is taking the conversation about integration much beyond something that consider related to CAD files publishing. In his final passage Hardi speaks about broader scope of integration challenges, migration to fully cloud based ecosystems and integration of cloud and non-cloud tools. This is a separate conversation and I hope to address it in one of my future posts.
What is my conclusion? CAD is a very specific data source. You can use mainstream file sharing cloud services to move CAD data around. However, in order to add viewing capabilities, get data on mobile and improve data sharing experience, you need to spend a great deal of integration effort. So, vertical vendors can provide value here. Just my thoughts…