@t_s_harvey: You raise a good point about vendors adding features and functions to the core platform of any software tool to encourage continual user upgrades--it's been an revenue strategy for decades, not just for CAD and design tool vendors, but for software providers in every category.
Yet I'm not sure that's the intent with this announcement. I think the trend is to offer packages and configurations that are tailored to a specific role or to a specific industry focus to provide a more individualized experience as opposed to jamming the CAD program with everything and making it a one-size-fits all package, which has been the traditional route. Given how the Web and mobile apps are changing the technology experience for consumers, letting them essentially pick and choose functions that are right for their way of working or their personal preferences, providers of professional software tools are looking to do the same. The reason? Users want nothing less from their professional tools than they get from their personal tools.
So I think the packaging options will be continue to become more flexible. The question is will the pricing model follow suit. That's the real wild card.
While it may be a good thing for Siemens, will it be a good thing for it's customers/users?
As an NX user, we already run into "that feature is not supported in your product mix, please upgrade to our xx package". I'm hoping that won't get even worse. I wouldn't be surprised to see the number of modules/packages grow, and the mix of which-one-has-what grow even more confusing. That way they can build a bewildering array of groupings and keep upgrade/purchase cycle going more often.
While that may be good for Siemens, it's not good for customers when the software company is removing or disablign features that used to be available...
I'm worried it will get even worse as making each division "separate and profit responsible" will likely lead to more infighting between the NX & Velocity groups as they each try to secure their customer base and poach from the other division...
Good points, Jack. The execution is always the critical thing. Given that they've done a pretty significant reorg and shifting around of core personnel, I'm thinking they're taking this pretty seriously. Time will tell.
From a marketing perspective, it is a good idea for Siemens to adopt a low-level granular approach. The ability to mix and match the technologies that are geared toward individual business segments should help with penetration. The question, however, for a company like Siemens will be their proper execution of this business model.
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.