One can't escape the thought that CAD tools are starting to become so broad-based and capable that they're no longer just CAD tools anymore. They're end-to-end product design and prototyping systems. This is not necessarily a bad thing. What it means, though, is that we have to stop treating them like pieces of licensed software, and starting treating them more like mission-critical apps, with all that that entails...like worrying about vendor lock in, data portability, security, etc...
CAD tools as part of broader PLM suites are exactly what you say, Alex: End-to-end product design and prototyping systems. As a result, for every function and bell and whistle that gets added to the CAD program, there are broader concerns, as you well point out, about interoperability, security, and perhaps, most importantly, integration with other key design platforms in functional areas beyond mechanical design.
Are they robots or androids? We're not exactly sure. Each talking, gesturing Geminoid looks exactly like a real individual, starting with their creator, professor Hiroshi Ishiguro of Osaka University in Japan.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.