Slashdot Mirror


Pro/Engineer Coming to Linux

PotatoHead writes " Parametric Technologies Corporation (PTC) announced in a recent press release, a Linux port of their flagship modeling product Pro Engineer. HP will be the preferred partner for the Linux platform release. This is pretty big news for the engineering and product design crowd folks. There must be some fairly credible requests coming in for this to happen."

216 comments

  1. yep by doc_side · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    woopie

  2. Uhhh... by FortKnox · · Score: 2

    I thought Pro/E was simply a file format standard for drafting and design. I also thought the standard was open. Why hasn't an open source project undergone making a CAD program that read/wrote Pro/E files? Is the need that little?

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Uhhh... by SquadBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because you are what we like to wrong. Pro/E is a full fledgled application. The reason there is no serious OSS CAD app is because the math and engineering knowledge needed to do this is not something a group of coders can do in their spare time. Also starting with 2000 and 2000i PTC started making the file formats binary in order to decrease size. I do know that they are willing to work with just about anyone who wants to be able to import Pro/E files into another app. So if you where able to write a OSS solid modeling kernel they would most likely be happy to help you make it able to import Pro/E files and of course they can export to *many* different formats. Just ask me about it a big part of my old job was figuring out import/export problems.

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    2. Re:Uhhh... by friday2k · · Score: 2

      Yes, he is very mistaken. Pro/E is one of the most complete CAD packages in Mechanical Engineering out there. It plays in the same league as ME10 and Solid Designer from CoCreate (a former HP division). There are companies that are actually undertaking the effort to put a meta format which does not loose Database links on top of the native CAD formats. One of them is CEA. Check it out, it is an interesting concept. If you do not want to buy such a product you can go with DXF or others.

    3. Re:Uhhh... by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. The desire for this is huge. There already a lot of firms using ProE who have to put up with many development environments because it wasn't a Linux option. Of course, some are willing to put up with VMWare-ing it but thats a PITA.

      Anyone who reads mailing lists or newsgroups knows how much people have been screaming for this. Just in case anyone was wondering, this might be one of those breakthrough apps that gives Linux mountains of credibility at the enterprise/collaberation level. This will probably help draw more developers to the platform; also something we could always use more of.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    4. Re:Uhhh... by uncleFester · · Score: 2

      I also thought the standard was open. Why hasn't an open source project undergone making a CAD program that read/wrote Pro/E files?

      Well, it's not as necessary when you have intermediate formats such as IGES already in most of the commercial packages of the same vein (ProE, PATRAN, I-DEAS, Auto<whatever>, etc etc...). Plus, some of the apps can directly read format variations of the other programs (being able to read PATRAN neutral files, I-DEAS 'export' files (they had a specific name, but it's been ~2 years since I touched I-DEAS), Abaqus input decks, etc etc...)

      And as a point of note, MSC has had a Linux (well, RedHat) version of PATRAN included with their dists for the last few releases. ANSYS has done it recently as well. HKS; it would be interesting to see the Abaqus solver go over.. that seems to be quite popular for FEA.

      Too bad I'm currently unemployed; it was fun working with that crap. :/

      --
      -'fester
    5. Re:Uhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VMWare'ing Pro/E? why, oh why, would you buy a $25k+ cad package (that's how much it costs with the goodies) to run it in a non-accelerated environment? this is a big league application boys and girls, and is usually run on big league (certified) hardware.

    6. Re:Uhhh... by WowTIP · · Score: 2

      No, and if you want to try it out and have access to a windows box, you can always download Pro/DESKTOP for free(!)...

      Pro/DESKTOP is kindda "Pro/E lite".

      --

      --

      "I'm surfin the dead zone
      In the twilight, unknown"
    7. Re:Uhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm....

      after licensing costs, I know we ran out of money for hardware.

      Not everyone has a Fortune 500 sized pocketbook.

  3. Top Notch Software by chill · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is top-notch software. Well, PRO/Engineer is, anyway. The last shop I worked at used Cadence but we had a lot of PRO/E CAD people who had come from Lockheed-Martin.

    OTOH, this is not cheap software. Usually several thousand $$ a seat.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Top Notch Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using proprietary software makes little RMS-Jesus cry.

    2. Re:Top Notch Software by Clue4All · · Score: 1

      That's GNU/X11/PRO/Engineer. Please, give credit where credit is due, it's the GNU way!

      --

      Is your browser retarded?
    3. Re:Top Notch Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's gotten much cheaper, just like Maya. It used to be $120,000 per seat many years ago. In 1998 our employer bought 3 seats @ ~$20,000. Today a license for Foundation is $3995. Everything is modular so if you need the mold design module add $15,000, if you need advanced surfacing add $10,000, if you need NC machining add $7000. Scary, huh?

    4. Re:Top Notch Software by Erotomek · · Score: 1

      OTOH, this is not cheap software. Usually several thousand $$ a seat.

      So, in other words, this software is free-as-lots-of-god-damn-expensive-beer?

      --

      Krótko: kady Erotomek
      W pimiennictwie ma swój domek.

  4. 3com logo ripoff by FattMattP · · Score: 1

    Nice 3com logo ripoff PTR has!

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    1. Re:3com logo ripoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the inflamed testicle logo

    2. Re:3com logo ripoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they had that logo before 3com changed to their current one.

    3. Re:3com logo ripoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ummm... Parametric has had this logo longer then 3Com has had their communist looking logo...

  5. CLIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've seen this acronym used by trolls a lot.

    What does it mean?

    1. Re:CLIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cabal of Logged In Trolls, deal with it bitch

  6. We made a request. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a company that currently owns around 50 ProE licences. I maintain the licenses for these computers and about 6 months ago we started to switch some of the workstations we had over to Linux for a variaty of reasons. At that time many of the engineers requested to me to talk to the ProE people to see if a Linux version is available. So, here we are.

    1. Re:We made a request. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it is all just thanks to you!?!?!?!?!? Woooow! You are sooooo amazing!

    2. Re:We made a request. by phrostie · · Score: 1

      You're IT!

  7. This is very cool by SquadBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    when I used to work at PTC customers where always asking about this and of course since it is working closely with HP odds are it will be Debian that will be officialy supported with it. There is a *huge* market for this. I'm sure many of my old friends are *very* happy.

    --

    Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    1. Re:This is very cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course since it is working closely with HP odds are it will be Debian that will be officialy supported with it.

      Great!

      gpdp138:~# apt-get install proengineer
      Reading Package Lists... Done
      Building Dependency Tree... Done
      E: Couldn't find package proengineer

      Whadda hell?!

  8. TCO by delta407 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, they are officially supporting Linux as a target platform, because they recognize it can have a lower TCO.

    Supporters of Linux point to a lower total cost of ownership because they can leverage their UNIX expertise on a free and open operating system running on cost-effective Intel architecture workstations.

    Which is true, of course, if they have UNIX expertise in-house. MCSEs are a dime a dozen, but good UNIX admins are quite expensive. If you go the consulting route, you get screwed with huge fees. If you train your personell, you get screwed with long courses and a decent change they simply won't get it.

    Then again, if you have a competent staff or a big budget, *nix all the way. I know firsthand that the grass really is greener on the *nix side of the fence, but sometimes that's not feasible for large corporations. (Besides, many corporations are brainless and/or inflexible, and won't switch away from their Novell file servers, Lotus Notes 2.0, and NT 3.51, but they have bigger problems.)

    1. Re:TCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The claims of significant savings are bogus. At a previous employer the average CAD jockey cost about $25K/year for Pro/E licenses yearly. The cost for their workstation was barely 10%, and the cost for their OS was less than 1%.

      I'm happy to see some decent CAD software getting ported to Linux, but let's get realistic about the real cost of using Linux -vs- Windows.

    2. Re:TCO by cpeterso · · Score: 1

      The claims of significant savings are bogus. At a previous employer the average CAD jockey cost about $25K/year for Pro/E licenses yearly. The cost for their workstation was barely 10%, and the cost for their OS was less than 1%.


      see, the plan is that once Pro/Engineer is released on Linux, people will bitch and moan that it is not open-source (ie free) and then move on to the next free-as-in-warez rally..

    3. Re:TCO by SoftwareJanitor · · Score: 2

      MCSEs are a dime a dozen

      Feh. Inexperienced or bad MCSE's may be cheap. But if you hire a dummy to administer your network -- you have a dummy administering your network. Bad value, even if its cheap.

      In my experience, good, experienced administrators are not significantly cheaper for Microsoft's platforms than are good, experienced *nix admins, and no more plentiful or easier to find either.

      Furthermore, in my experience, you often need fewer *nix admins for a given number of users (or a given number of servers), so in many cases *nix is cheaper to administer in the long run.

    4. Re:TCO by mhesseltine · · Score: 1

      The thing to realize is that many people running Pro/E are running on HP-UX workstations, so they do have the *nix experience. True, this software has been ported to Windows, but most of these packages (Pro/E, CATIA, Solidworks, Algor) started with roots in UNIX

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    5. Re:TCO by Daimaou · · Score: 1

      I think it is a very wise choice on PTC's part to offer ProE on the Linux platform. It is awesome software and only makes sense to offer it on a powerful and stable OS like Linux.

      While your point about Unix consultants being more expensive is true during the initial deployment stage, those costs drop off once the system is in place (assuming consultants). This is not as much the case with Windows, which is why you need those dime a dozen MCSEs. If a company had to pay as much to support Windows as Unix, no company would be running Windows.

      Having worked on and supported both ends of the Windows vs. Unix spectrum, my experience has been while the initial setup and configuration of Windows may be shorter than say Linux, the overall support required by the Windows platform quickly eats up any savings a short and easy installation may provide. In the long run, the support costs involved with running Windows is far greater than the support costs running Unix.

      This is why I think PTC's desicion to offer Pro/Engineer on Linux is great news for shops that use their software. A lower TCO can only mean increased profits. Who can deny the snazzy of that?

    6. Re:TCO by SoftwareJanitor · · Score: 2

      Aw crap. I should have previewed. Only the first line of the preceeding post should have been italicized. Dohh.

    7. Re:TCO by FatherOfONe · · Score: 1

      First, I think that this is good news. I hope for the day when I don't have to hear "Well I would switch but XYZ app isn't on Linux".

      But your statement about people not wanting to switch off of Novell/Lotus/NT 3.51... I have to ask why should they? I have a church that has been running Mandrake 7.x for well over 2 years now with 0 downtime! It acts as a PDC and a file/print server. That is all they ever needed. We are just now looking at migrating to RedHat 7.3, because they want to do some more with the server. I know of shops with Novell 4.x that have been up for 3+ years with no downtime. Their data gets backed up and they are happy. I agree that in most shops it doesn't make sense to stay back on software forever, but in a lot a places it makes a heck of a lot of sense.

      I currently support a Novell 5, NT 4.x and RedHat Linux shop. I like stuff about all three and hate stuff about all three. If the grass is greener on the *nix side of the house, then when the heck are they going to loose the "Owner, Group, Other" file permissions? Specifically when will it ship with most major distro's? Have you ever tried to admin a system with over a couple hundred people and had to deal with this. It sucks when compared to Novell and NT. It is kinda sad in my opinion that the latest UNIX systems still haven't addressed this feature, but NT 3.5 and Novell 2.x did. That is why some of these shops don't want to switch. That and the fact that until Solaris 9, the UNIX answer to directory service was LDAP. Of course this was LDAP with no real tools to admin anything.

      --
      The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
    8. Re:TCO by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      You really should do a bit more research before making clueless generalizations. Various Unixen have support ACLs for some time now. If you want a Unix with ACLs, simply bother to look.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:TCO by Fnord · · Score: 2

      I agree that UNIX needs ACLs. However several of the major commercial UNIXs have supported ACLs out of the box for a while (most noteably Solaris and AIX). No none of the Linux distros use ACLs, but there is a kernel patch out there, and even if you don't feel like monkeying around with your kernel, version 2.6 (and distributions based on it) will use ACLs as the primary security model (from what I've read rwx security will actually be implemented on top of ACLs). And as for LDAP, if you have the right tools LDAP is a beautiful thing. And if you don't have nice tools....its very scriptable.

    10. Re:TCO by linuxislandsucks · · Score: 1

      I have to diasgree....I have foudn that the ones that have MSCEs are the ones that are least likely to be able to think on their feet..

      Its kind of like asking someone who can just operate a saw to do good quality woodwork..

      Once you identify the ones who can think in your system adm pool of people you wil not have a problem..unless of course there is no one in that group that thinks..

      --
      Don't Tread on OpenSource
    11. Re:TCO by delta407 · · Score: 2

      First, I think that this is good news.

      And I agree.

      But your statement about people not wanting to switch off of Novell/Lotus/NT 3.51... I have to ask why should they?

      Because supporting Novell, Lotus Notes, and NT 3.51 on the desktop is a nightmare, that's why. I agree in that servers can be left alone (heck, I have a box on a Linux 2.0 kernel that has yet to reboot), but on the desktop it does not make sense to use software that was obselete in 1996.

      when the heck are they going to loose the "Owner, Group, Other" file permissions?

      It's efficient and not all that hard to use. It's just as flexible as NT 3.5 and Novell 2.x -- what can NT 3 do that *nix file permissions can't?

      Have you ever tried to admin a system with over a couple hundred people and had to deal with this. It sucks when compared to Novell and NT.

      I administer a network of a couple hundred people. It's my day job. I've had few file permissions issues, and far more issues with NT boxen shooting themselves in the foot. (In the past week, two Win2k print servers having their Print Spooler programs stop responding under zero load for no apparent reason. Of course, it was still "Started", so Win2k didn't give it a swift kick in the pants.)

      Besides, if the grass is greener on the Windows side of the fence, why does *nix beat the tar out of Windows in terms of administration? I can reconfigure network cards via SSH, even the one I'm connected through. I can change the hostname without rebooting. I can create and schedule complex tasks with confidence that they will actually run. I can swap out critical system components without creating any downtime. I can partition, format, and allocate new storage space on a file server under full load. Not to mention the fact that the *nix command line is many, many, many times more powerful than the Windows point-and-click interface.

      until Solaris 9, the UNIX answer to directory service was LDAP

      Ever hear of NIS?

    12. Re:TCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing to realize is that many people running Pro/E are running on HP-UX workstations, so they do have the *nix experience. True, this software has been ported to Windows, but most of these packages (Pro/E, CATIA, Solidworks, Algor) started with roots in UNIX

      Exactly right. The TCO reduction is realized by switching from expensive PA-RISC stations to cheaper Linux boxes and still be able to work in a *NIX environment.

      Really it is about time that Parametric got around to this, MSC went Linux on IBM boxes two? years ago and they really have been floundering recently. I am not sure why this got such big press since they are only the latest in a string of MCAD companies going Linux. At any rate this does nothing to lessen the disdain I feel for the company, and in particular their sales staff.

    13. Re:TCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the idea is that Linux is more stable/flexible/extendible etc. and while the difference in intial cost between Linux and Windows ($0 vs. $couple hundred) is a tinny percent of the cost of the workstation + software + maintenance it will save money down the road. The real expense in an Engineering dept is wasted time (esp. when the guy sitting in front of the computer makes $100,000) and delayed products, etc. And if Linux means less downtime, less admin time, then it can add up to big money saved.

  9. Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is great news, the engineering crowd has been stuck with MS for a while now. The Linux CAD area is one place where we could use some support. This is not a slam on the CAD stuff that's out there, but Pro-E is in a different league.

    Pro-E is also VERY expensive when compared with the other CAD packages though....I'd really like to see Solidworks for Linux. I could TOTALY walk away from MS if that happened. I imagine that there are a lot of engineering operations that could do it too. All Linux workstations, no MS anywhere from the engineering office all the way out to the production floor.

    I've recently written to the folks at Solidworks too, sort of the "....I'm really interested and would buy seats now if I had the opportunity..." No reply.

    How about a really "kick-ass" engineering document control program to go with that?...I was just thinking about that last night, something to compete with Agile and the like.....

    1. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by XavierPenguin · · Score: 1

      How about Windchill?

    2. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by robmohr · · Score: 1

      I ditto the idea for SolidWorks to get onto Linux.

      Last summer I asked a SolidWorks sales VP, Boulder-Denver, if a Linux port was in the pipeline. He said no; "We're sticking with MS."

      Has anyone had any success using 3d cad on a linux box; what is it called, VariCAD?
      eof

    3. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by fahrvergnugen · · Score: 2

      I did my college internships with a company in Colorado called IntegWare. They made at the time a very good (if fairly ugly) PDM solution that tied directly into Pro/E as well as many of the then-popular document markup programs. I'd imagine it's only gotten better in the last few years, as they've still got the same people heading up the company.

      --
      Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
    4. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Mechanica? Actually, nevermind. I'd rather use Algor instead of Mechanicrap.

    5. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by MrResistor · · Score: 2

      I'm not surprised at their lack of response. Solidworks is a sweet package, and it's really easy to use, but they don't give a rats ass about their user's opinions. That's pretty crappy when you consider that the users are paying as much as $9k per seat for the privilege of being ignored.

      Also, SolidWorks is very tightly integrated with Excel and is scriptable in VBA. Until Excel and VBA are officially supportewd on Linux there is not a chance in hell that you will see SolidWorks for Linux.

      Conversely, Pro-E has had a Unix version available for some time now, or at least that's what I've been told. I imagine it wasn't that big of a leap for them to get it running on Linux.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    6. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by jabster · · Score: 1
      Last summer I asked a SolidWorks sales VP, Boulder-Denver, if a Linux port was in the pipeline. He said no; "We're sticking with MS."

      ====

      heh. i was laughed at when *I* asked.

      Those SW people can be real pricks sometimes.

      -john

      --
      Slashdot: you'll not find a more wretched collection of villainy and disreputable types...
    7. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Locutus · · Score: 3, Informative
      VariCAD is the best I came across for CAD on Linux. It's got 3D and can import/export Autocad files along with exporting IGES files from it's own 3D file format.

      Leagues less functional than Pro/E but the price is VERY good. I think it's around $300 now.

      VariCad web site

      This Pro/E announcement is awesome news though....

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    8. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My boss (an architectural engineer) told me he would take Windows off all of our computers if AutoCad was written for Linux.

      I'm waiting.

    9. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SolidWorks becoming available on any *nix would be a serious effort, requireing vast rewrites. Pro/E on the other hand is a native *nix app, which was then kludged up to be runnable on NT. If SolidWorks were to ever become available on Linux, expect it to be as bad as Pro/E was on NT 4 years ago

    10. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Cogline · · Score: 1
      It probably helps greatly that UGS has released Parasolid for Linux. I can't find the press release describing this, but the link for supported platforms says enough:

      http://www.eds.com/products/plm/parasolid/portfoli o/supported.shtml I'm eager to see what other high end CAD/CAM (UGS, CATIA) programs get ported as a response to this...

    11. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A good technical document management solution I've seen that competes with the Agiles and Windchills of the world is from a company called Eigner. Has some great direct interfaces to all the major CAD and ECAD packages.

    12. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep waiting. As long as Carol's in charge, it's unlikely AutoCAD will find its way to a UNIX platform again. Heck, you might stand a better chance of seeing AutoCAD ported to Java before it would get a native port to Linux.

    13. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ProE started out on UNIX in 1988, acutally for a long time it was only available on Silicon Graphics systems running IRIX. They didn't port to Windows NT until the late 1990's (1997 maybe?)

    14. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by siemce · · Score: 1
      This is not entirely true. First, your CAD package definition is too broad, let's just stick to solid modeling packages, and speaking of which Pro-E is probably one of the cheapest ones if compared to Unigraphics or Ideas/SDRC (which is dead anyways). Those 2 + Catia have the majority of the market share. Pro-E is usually used by small shops. For the big ones that use it it's almost never the major solid modeling software.

      Don't get me wrong, I like Pro-E, I would very much so have it running on Linux in my shop, but if you are a supplier you don't have much choice - you have to use what they tell you to.

      ... and it goes like this ... Chrysler - Catia, GM - Unigraphics, Ford - Ideas/SDRC (in search of new cad software since SDRC was bought by EDS, people say it will be Catia, but let's hope they turn into Pro-E), Boening - Catia, Pratt & Whitney - Unigraphics (if I'm not mistaken), Lockheed Martin - a little bit of everything.

    15. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by Junta · · Score: 2

      Wouldn't be hard at all, the only platform specific part is the installer, the rest is all done in java, if there is enough of a cry, I'd imagine Windchill/ProjectLink could *easily* run under linux.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    16. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by gruntvald · · Score: 1

      why would I take advice on the automotive industries cad use from a guy who doesn't drive anything newer than 50 years old?

    17. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by siemce · · Score: 1

      and how did you figure that out?

    18. Re:Good, that's one of my only reasons to stay MS! by gruntvald · · Score: 1

      Uh ... it's a Cussler thing ....

  10. Linux is becoming the default in ASIC engineering by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have been in ASIC engineering for the past 11 years. I have seen things moving towards Linux as the underlying OS for the past 2-3 years.

    It appears to go hand in hand with the fastest uniprocessor platforms looking fast compared to the fastest uniprocessor suns.

    The software we use is very expensive and generally compute intensive. So it pays to run it on the fastest hardware and it pays to buy the fastest hardware when it is the cheapest. The only exceptions are tools that require 64 bit addresses to permit enough memory to be installed (E.G. IC layout). Sun still wins there.

    When PCs are both the fastest and cheapest and Unix is the operating system of choice for engineers and Linux is both free and good, the preference is obvious.

    We pretty much will not buy software that does not run on Linux and the ASIC tool vendors know it.

    The same market forces seem to apply in here mechanical engineering.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  11. I-Deas Next? by mfago · · Score: 1

    Hopefully this will force EDS to port I-Deas to Linux as well.

    I had been trying without success to get SDRC to port to linux before they were bought out. I was really pissed off when SDRC ported it to Windows and my employer took away my HP-UX.

    1. Re:I-Deas Next? by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

      Submitted by a cow-orker of Potatohead's:

      We've talked to people at "the corporation formerly known as SDRC" more than once about a Linux version. In the end, they said they could only port to so many *nix platforms, so which one did we propose they supplant? We read that to mean "not likely". After all, this was an engineering company at heart (read conservative), and they weren't about to drop a few existing customers for a potential of many more...

      Now as a division of EDS, we don't hold any more hope for them than before. EDS has embraced the .NET route, and this is sure to impact the PLM-Solutions division.

    2. Re:I-Deas Next? by FuBaR+Technician · · Score: 1

      They will call the new version PDGS ;-)

    3. Re:I-Deas Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now as a division of EDS, we don't hold any more hope for them than before. EDS has embraced the .NET route, and this is sure to impact the PLM-Solutions division.

      Not quite true. EDS is actually pretty open on the server-side, with a lot of support for Java/J2EE. The desktop is 100% MS, but we're as much in bed with Sun/Oracle/BEA as we are with MS.

      Of course, you're average EDSer has no clue about Linux (and double that for management), so don't expect a big push to port UG or I-Deas.

    4. Re:I-Deas Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hopefully this will force EDS to port I-Deas to Linux as well.

      Ahhh... my life would be complete with I-DEAS for Linux/GNU. Unfortunately, I-DEAS for anything is staring death in the face, so there seems to be little hope for a Linux/GNU version.

      That said, EDS PLM Solutions is planning a united package with features from I-DEAS and Unigraphics, based on the hugely popular Parasolid kernel, which, by the way, has a Linux/GNU port. Hope on the horizon? Who knows. But it seems lately that EDS PLM Solutions is brushing off PTC as an insignificant threat. I doubt they will react to this PTC move.

    5. Re:I-Deas Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patran is a very powerful alternative to IDEAS and is now available from MSC on Linux. It is working well for us.

    6. Re:I-Deas Next? by bobby_in_oxford · · Score: 1

      UG Parasolid is ported to Linux. So with parasolid ported it would be possible for UG to port to Linux without much pain. However a while ago the Linux port was shelved after cutomer demand was luke warm at best. Large customers pretty much drive the industry. Without the push by them, CAD companies are not willing to invest in another port. Can't say besides the Educational area that any major CAD/CAM Accounts are making plans to move Linux to the Engineering desktop... sigh... A Microsoft position has nothing to do with it. Just keep your fingers crossed and hope sales forces the issue.

    7. Re:I-Deas Next? by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

      Too bad really. (Potatohead this time, not the cow-worker!) I-DEAS is a great modeling package. It user interface has more thought behind it than some software has for its entire development.

      I hate to see it running under win32. Most of the color is gone, and all the additional customization features do little to improve the experience while producing bugs that lower the stability of the package...

  12. Mobster John Gotti Dead at 61 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mobster John Gotti died at 61 today in his mineapolis prison. Even if you weren't murdered by him he probably shookdown your union, truely a criminal icon.

  13. finally! by jabster · · Score: 1
    THIS is a good thing. It's very good to see one of the leading 3D modelling/design companies make their product available for Linux.

    From first hand experience, i know many of the pitfalls associated with using complex, resource intensive software on a windows platform. Memory leaks. Memory _limits_ (ugh!). Crash to desktops several times a day. Have to reboot after every crash. Have to restart the program every now and then to clear up memory you've been using. Having HUGE files because of the way M$ saves things.

    The above refers to Solidworks, which i unfortunately have to use. Hopefully, with PTC going back to Unix (linux now), solidworks will start in that direction. Tho they're so entrenched with M$, i don't know if they have the talent or ability to actually write stable software. I guess it depends on how tightly M$ is holding their leash.

    this is a damn good thing for the solid modelers and designers out there!!

    --john

    --
    Slashdot: you'll not find a more wretched collection of villainy and disreputable types...
  14. Wine, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree that Linux is a natural platform for high-end CAD. Why oh why has Autocad not been released for Linux? Here's a question: Can any of these programs be made to work with Wine? If MS Office can work on Wine, maybe Autocad can too? One cool thing is that now that one company has done it, the others will feel pressure to keep up. We all win from that.

    1. Re:Wine, perhaps? by SoftwareJanitor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why oh why has Autocad not been released for Linux?

      AutoCAD used to be available for a number of the proprietary *nixes (Solaris, SGI IRIX, HP/UX, etc) back in the Release 10, 11, 12 (and early R13) days. People I used to know that worked at AutoDesk used to make sort of veiled hints that Microsoft put some kind of pressure on them to quit supporting alternative platforms. More or less what they were saying is that AutoDesk was told if didn't quit supporting non-Microsoft platforms that Microsoft would enter the CAD market (possibly by buying up one of AutoDesk's competitors), or at least announce that they were going to, and that would kill AutoDesk by "giving away" the product. But of course nobody in those days would dare come right out and say something like that.

    2. Re:Wine, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So MS was going to enter the CAD market, and put them out of business? That's the best one I've heard in months.

      Man, you slashdotters will believe anything about MS that is negative or sneaky, and mod it up. Yeah, I heard MS was going to cure cancer if NIH quit using their machines, and put them out of business. Now mod me up!

    3. Re:Wine, perhaps? by nathanm · · Score: 2

      You're right on.

      At Autodesk University in 1995, Autodesk, Sun, HP, SGI, & IBM were all pushing AutoCAD R13 for Unix. They had lots of demos, whitepapers, seminars, etc. Most people were still using the DOS versions of AutoCAD then (us included).

      Then AutoCAD R14 came out for Windows only. Autodesk is completely in bed with Microsoft now.

    4. Re:Wine, perhaps? by Mongr · · Score: 1

      Actually the rumor that I heard most, was that M$ footed the bill for a big chunk of rhe programming of the Windows version, on the condition that ADESK drop support for other platforms. And it sure seems like thats what happened...since when the windows version came out, the others were killed off.

      --
      -=Mongr=-
    5. Re:Wine, perhaps? by truthdetector2004 · · Score: 1

      So MS was going to enter the CAD market, and put them out of business? That's the best one I've heard in months.

      Is it any worse than Microsoft writing an entire Java compiler/runtime, only to bastardize it to only use Windows-specific libraries?

      Does the name XBox ring a bell?

      Any person who's been in IT long enough will not discount anything like this Autocad threat as merely a rumor, given Microsoft's past and current behavior.

      --
      Mod me down all you want. You know I'm right. (It's a pun. Laugh.)
    6. Re:Wine, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
      I worked at Autodesk in Unix ports as they were being fazed out. The real reason Autodesk quit making Unix AutoCAD? It just didn't sell.

      Most of the Unix AutoCAD sales went to major accounts like government or aerospace/military. Around the time we started porting AutoCAD R13 to Unix Microsoft was making inroads selling Windows NT in those very same markets. To the pointy-haired IT managers it was a good excuse to get the engineers on the same type of systems the rest of the non-technical folks in these companies were using. And back in those days Unix workstations were priced quite high compared to WinTel hardware.

      BTW, these ports were mostly paid for by the hardware manufacturers (i.e. Sun paid for the SunOS and Solaris ports, IBM for the AIX, etc.).

      MS did pressure to prevent further development of a Mac port, however. One of the Mac programmers put a sign on his door: "Welcome to Autodesk--a division of Microsoft. Or it might as well be."

      Nowadays the code base is so MS-centric it'd be difficult and expensive for AutoCAD to be ported to anything but Windows. And I'm sure MS would have a cow if Autodesk tried and would probably pressure to prevent, say, a Linux port. Now a Mac OS X port would be interesting. The Mac ports had a loyal following among Architects...

      The threat of MS entering the CAD market was (is?) real and at one time was the biggest threat to Autodesk.

      I still remember the new CEO getting rid of Ted Nelson and AMIX back in the early 90's--the thinking was that nothing would every become of this online hyperlinking stuff. Oh, well...can't win 'em all.

  15. Pro/E Infor by bill · · Score: 3, Funny

    For all you non-mechanical engineer types, Pro/Engineer is a 3-d modeling tool. The other big ones out there are SolidWorks (which is hugely popular, mostly due to its lower cost, but similar quality) and at a lower scale, AutoCad Mechanical Desktop/Inventor.

    As an aside, Cadence generally doesn't do mechanical modeling software. They do PCB design, schematic entry, simulation and of course IC design and verification.

    This is news, but for most Linux users, forget about buying Pro/E. It costs big time - and the companies that use Pro/E already can afford bigtime boxes (Sparcs, etc) to run them on. Now if SolidWorks were to push into the Linux arena, things would start to get interesting...

    1. Re:Pro/E Infor by zeus_tfc · · Score: 2

      For all you non-mechanical engineer types, Pro/Engineer is a 3-d modeling tool. The other big ones out there are SolidWorks (which is hugely popular, mostly due to its lower cost, but similar quality) and at a lower scale, AutoCad Mechanical Desktop/Inventor.

      Uh, dude, what about Catia, Unigraphics (the Solidworks full version, I think) and my personal arena of modeling wizardry, IDEAS from the folks at SDRC before it got bought out by the Unigraphics company. Catia is used by Chrysler (I think) and Ideas is used extensively by Ford. (I'm in the Auto industry, what can I say.) Ford MAY be going to Catia in its new projects since the SDRC buyout.

      Anyway, back on topic. CAD packages are in real need of some linux support. The Catia and Ideas workstation in our office run on Solaris, on overpriced leased hardware. I will admit that Unix has impressed me greatly. It almost never crashes, even when using a buggy program, and I can usually remote login and kill the app that is hanging my tube. I hope that other CAD software mfg'ers follow the trend. It would really cut our costs and hopefully make hardware upgrades more frequent.

      --
      "...At the end of the day"..."when everyone goes home, you're stuck with yourself." RIP Layne Staley
    2. Re:Pro/E Infor by Locutus · · Score: 2

      I would think that SolidWorks would be REALLY looking at Linux now that this news is out. After all, if the Pro/E people are looking for a better cost solution isn't that what SoldWorks marketing strategy is?

      They'll be on Linux in no time. IMHO.

      There is VariCAD for lighter weight CAD work now. 2D and 3D.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    3. Re:Pro/E Infor by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "For all you non-mechanical engineer types, Pro/Engineer is a 3-d modeling tool. The other big ones out there are SolidWorks (which is hugely popular, mostly due to its lower cost, but similar quality) and at a lower scale, AutoCad Mechanical Desktop/Inventor."

      Others in this category are SDRC I-DEAS and Catia.

      I-DEAS is used by Ford and Toyota.

      Catia was used to design the Boeing 767 Jetliner.

      These pieces of software are powerful because you can model pretty much anything you want in 3D space and assign it material properties. Then you can do various stress/strain, fluid mechanical, vibro-acoustical and other such Finite Element modelling. This saves you big money because the requirement for building models is reduced.

      Furthermore, these products can help you design the manufacturing process, once again reducing your costs.

      Still, this is just the tip of the iceberg and I have probably used only 5% of the functionality of products like these. (I am an engineering student.)

    4. Re:Pro/E Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Catia was used to design the Boeing 767 Jetliner.

      s/767/777/

      The 767 was designed in the 1970s. Not many folks running CATIA back in those days, I'll wager.

    5. Re:Pro/E Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people mindlessly spew that Pro/E is more expensive than SolidWorks? Current pricing puts the two with maintenance within $100 of each other depending upon who your Pro/E rep is (The seat of Pro/E is more expensive by about $250, but PTC doesn't threaten thier VAR's with death for lowering thier maintenance fees, thus maintenace for Pro/E has fallen in the past year).

    6. Re:Pro/E Infor by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "Catia was used to design the Boeing 767 Jetliner. "

      Correction, it was the 777 not 767. My bad.

    7. Re:Pro/E Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having spent time with the C3P folks at Ford, don't count on a switch to Catia. They've finally gotten everyone off of PDGS, so I don't think that management will try to push another CAD/CAE/CAM/PIM/PDM package switch. There's a lot of in-house momentum behind I-DEAS, and a switch would be a huge cost that probably isn't needed by FMC.

    8. Re:Pro/E Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PTC doesn't threaten thier VAR's with death for lowering thier maintenance fees,

      No, PTC just threatens their customers with death by way of telling lies to VPs and CEOs. Decent software but really evil sales staff (which is why Ford is I-DEAS)

    9. Re:Pro/E Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is news, but for most Linux users, forget about buying Pro/E. It costs big time - and the companies that use Pro/E already can afford bigtime boxes (Sparcs, etc) to run them on."

      This is not true. Many small to mid sized companies use ProE on Windows NT/2000/XP machines. Pro/E used to be a UNIX only thing, and the hardware was there to get the job done (SUN, SGI). PCs have been doing 3D for a while now and for many years the low to mid end has been moving to Windows (unfortuneatly), and customers who couldn't afford a UNIX solution have been able to buy into a Windows solution. I'll be glad to see a move away from Windows to Linux on the low end, the high end is still owned by SGI & SUN.

    10. Re:Pro/E Infor by zeus_tfc · · Score: 1

      I have heard, being a Ford supplier, that Ford is already using catia for the newer programs. Besides, Ideas is dead. The buyout by UG was, I've heard, only to get the metaphase IMI bridge for accessing data between companies. UG has no real plans for Ideas except phasing it out.

      --
      "...At the end of the day"..."when everyone goes home, you're stuck with yourself." RIP Layne Staley
    11. Re:Pro/E Infor by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      You apparently haven't spent any time with them recently. There is already one new car program using catia, with one more expected within a few months. Not only that, PDGS is still used quite a bit within Ford.

  16. not free by oyenstikker · · Score: 2

    apt-get install proeng. . .oh wait, they're going to charge MONEY for this aren't they? Hopefully if a few big-name apps get people to accept buying software for linux, we'll see a lot more.

    --
    The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    1. Re:not free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People do in fact buy software for linux.

      I have bought my fairshare of games and applications. But if there is a free version that has the features i will be using then i go with that. its common sense, why bother buying some application that has bells and whistles that i will never touch.

  17. Maybe a bit late for PTC... by Papineau · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ProE started on the Unix platform, then almost totally migrated to NT (and 2k). But they kept the same kind of interface, which needed some time to get used to (all menus in a single window, the next of which overlaps the previous...). They had the potential to really take the market with their parametric technology, which was a lot more advanced than what AutoCad could (can) offer. But then some other ones rose...
    Personnally, I'm leaning towards SolidWorks. The licensing costs are smaller than those of the competition, and it's very pleasant to work with. Very Windows-centric, but the interface is fast to get accustomed to.
    And it impossible to pass by Catia V5. The precedent versions were almost exclusively Unix-based, but they also made the switch to NT. The interface is really nice (reminiscent of XP, but a few years before). Pleasant to use, but V5 is still being developped, so the stability on the latest release is not always top notch.
    There's also Autodesk's Inventor, although I never used it personally.

    Of course, then there's the support for third-parties modules. This can hurt initialy the introduction of a new platform (CAD or HW).

    Kudos to PTC for bringing their product to Linux. I know there's been some people asking them to do it for a few years now. But one has to wonder if it's because they feel some pressure to maintain their share of the market.

    1. Re:Maybe a bit late for PTC... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      You should give IronCAD a try. Windows only, at the moment, but DAMN intuitive to use. Hmmm, I should get paid for a comment like this :) But as a mech. eng., I like anything which is not Autocad :)

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    2. Re:Maybe a bit late for PTC... by Rapier_M · · Score: 1

      I think I must be the only person in the world who actually likes Pro/E's menu driven interface. I really like being able to read the names of actions on the menus instead of having to guess at what different icons do. But then again, I also use the command line in AutoCAD to the exclusion of the icons...

    3. Re:Maybe a bit late for PTC... by Papineau · · Score: 2

      But then again, I also use the command line in AutoCAD to the exclusion of the icons...
      I agree with you on that last point. Especially when you need to use a couple of variations of the same function (like draw a circle by it's diameter, then 3 points, then center+radius, etc.), the command line is preferable. But AutoCad as a whole has mostly been left behind in terms of ease of modifying a model, etc. It still does the work with older drawings, but as soon as you don't have any (or don't mind redoing them in something a bit more sane), you'll find you don't want to use it again. Pro/E, Catia, SolidWorks, IDEAS, to name only those with which I have first-hand experience, are the way to go as far as modeling goes. For floor plans, AutoCad still has some traction, because it's ok for 2D drawings. But for 3D parts (even simple ones), forget about AutoCad (or use at least use MechanicalDesktop/Inventor if you can, preferably one of the 4 I mentionned earlier). It means not having to update different views by hand (and possibly missing one or introducing errors), having a much better grasp on the shape for odd shapes, and all around easier modifications (because you have a tree of all the features which form the part, so you can modify an earlier feature and the subsequent features will update themselves), instead of only lines and arcs in AutoCad.

      Rapier, the end of the comment is not meant to you (as you seem to already know that), but more to the people for who AutoCad is one of the only MCAD programs they heard of (as it's pretty much dead now, except for old drawings).

    4. Re:Maybe a bit late for PTC... by Rapier_M · · Score: 1

      I agree that for serious modeling a parametric modeler is the the way to go. I used AutoCAD for years and then moved to a company that uses Pro/E. It was awsome. But, AutoCAD is still usefull if all you need is a quick sketch to get the message across.

      By the way, I've used mechanical desktop and was serious unimpressed. If you're going to do 3D it's a great improvement from AutoCAD, but it's nowhere near as usable as Pro/E.

    5. Re:Maybe a bit late for PTC... by puetzc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is a ProE forum at www.prouser.org. Mentions of Linux always raise a lot of "Cool - when" responses. Most of the major CAD packages have come from either a UNIX or main frame background, as PC's have only had the required horsepower for 5-6 years. This is a market where $1000+ graphic cards are still discussed, and were the debate of how much memory is needed in a new workstation starts at 1G, with questions as to whether this is enough or not (NOT, if you are doing serious work on large assemblies.) The advantages of better memory and swap handling, better network stacks and stability keep SUN in business, as a PC with Windows maxes out at 1.6G of RAM (you can add more, but it won't be used). If you need 4G to do the job, you need UNIX.

      The discussions abour SolidWorks and AutoCAD have their place, but putting a whole tractor in electronic form (I work for Deere & Co), with every bend in the sheet metal and bump on the transmission housing, requires more that those products can deliver. Is it worth it? It is when all pieces fit the first time, with no reworking of tools or expensive trial pieces for fit-up checks only.

      While ProE is far from perfect, it is closer than the other tools I have tried. I was certainly sad the day I lost HP-UX and moved to WindowsNT, however. Windows2000 hasn't eased my pain.

      I am a Linux user at home, and would jump at the chance to use it at work for ProE. I don't know the the IS group in a large corporation will be able to be that open minded, but I certainly welcome the change to give it a try.

  18. Written by Russians, used by Lockheed Martin by BlowCat · · Score: 0, Troll
    PTC was founded by Russian emigrants and almost everybody there are people from Russia. Yet Lockheed Martin uses their product (Pro/E). I know that because I had an HP workstation formerly used by Lockheed Martin, and they forgot to clean up the hard drive! If some people are afraid of malicious open source, what can those Russians put into the closed source code?

    Just because Pro/E runs on Linux now, it is not safer. Unless a team of qualified programmers can audit the code, I would not do any work on it, if it's related to defence and national security.

    1. Re:Written by Russians, used by Lockheed Martin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nice try troll

    2. Re:Written by Russians, used by Lockheed Martin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did this post get a score of 2? Is Slashdot supporting this redneckedness of americans?

    3. Re:Written by Russians, used by Lockheed Martin by pcardoso · · Score: 1

      And I suppose everyone in europe, asia, africa, and the rest of the world (not including the US, obviously), should refuse to use Windows/Office, and everything else coming from the US, as no qualified (not that being qualified means much in this case) team of programmers can audit that code.

      Grow up, will ya? What would those russians put in the source code? A warezed clone of tetris?

    4. Re:Written by Russians, used by Lockheed Martin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, but it's a US company based out of Mass.
      the other big player in industrial grade CAD applications is Dassault, with Catia, also used by Lockheed. The fun thing is, Dassault is a French company, that also makes fighter planes that compete on the world market with Lockheed. And their CAD product is based on a in-house cad product they initially purchased from- Lockheed... =)

  19. New Horizons by Grip3n · · Score: 1

    I think Linux has finally hit the knee of the curve, we're going to be seeing a lot more ports like this in the future.

    --
    To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
  20. Interesting news.. by Chicane-UK · · Score: 1

    I had to setup a lab @ work on a 'budget' to get this software to run.. we had gone through various systems because (and I guess I can appreciate that) the software was exceptionally fussy about the hardware it ran on. Had to be like this perticular brand of Dell, etc etc.. I told my company to trust me and bought some well built but reasonably priced AMD/GeForce2/DDR systems (after consulting the Pro/Engineer compatability list and various forums) - and after two years of stress from other cheap ass systems, these boxes ran it great. In fact, haven't had a single support call for them in 8+ months.. :)

    Again - it frustrates me that where I work sometimes wants to do stuff like this (especially where the software costs more than the hardware) on a cheap budget..

    I had inititally suggested that they buy some 2nd hand SGI's but realised that I would be the sole person responsible for looking after the systems (only person at work who even knows UNIX) but also realised that most of the people who would be using Pro/E could hardly use Windows.. let alone IRIX!

    --
    "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
    1. Re:Interesting news.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GeForce2 is not a good choice for a CAD card, esp. with Pro/E. You are limited to only a handful of windows before the card/system grind to a crawl (something to do with limited memory for overlay planes or something). There are also quality/accuracy issues with cards that are aimed at gamers and boast high fill rates (hey kids, remember to lock your refresh rate to your monitor sync! 72FPS constant). Out of all the other gaming card nVidia is probably your best bet, they tend to implement most of the OpenGL API in their hardware, though not all of it but still more than their competitors. A much better choice for the PC is almost any card made by 3dLabs.

      I would have opted to go the SGI route, quite a pleasant environment for modeling/product development. At the very least using a proprietary UNIX OS+hardware as the backend and cheaper boxes for the workstations makes imense sense.

      [rant] A place where I worked spent $8000, last summer, on a Dell PowerEdge (1x933MHz PIII, 256MB RAM, RAID-5 /w 3x36GB disk, 80GB tape backup) with a 25 client license of Windows2000. They could have purchased an 8 processor SGI Origin2000 deskside unit with 2GB RAM, tape, RAID, unlimited clients, and enough I/O to suit their needs for the next century and had enough money left over to buy imported beer and a pig to roast at the company picknick. Plus they would have saved the $60,000 that code-red caused them plus all the other virus problems, plus constant down time ("Hey everybody log off and stop your work, we need to restart the server!" three times a day) plus the need the stop the company for a few days and reinstall/patch/upgrade every PC and workstation. And I could go on and on about admins who don't know what the Active Directory is for or how a misconfigured Exchange server ate everyone's email (nothing like seeing the head of engineering crouched over a laptop in the server closet getting mail through hotmail over AOL!) or how everyone uses local profiles and local user databases instead of using floating profiles and domain level user databases. [/rant]

  21. Hasn't it already been ported? by brad3378 · · Score: 1

    As Far as I know, Pro E has already been ported to Linux.

    Now if only SDRC I-DEAS was available for Linux
    :)

    --

    1. Re:Hasn't it already been ported? by brad3378 · · Score: 2

      Yes I am replying to myself.
      I thought that Pro E had already been ported to Linux because of something I read on SDRC's chat board.

      Although I'm not a regular Pro-E user, Its great news for Mechanical Engineers / Designers. In my opinion, the greatest advantage of running CAD software on a *NIX box is that I can more easily write scripts to do my work. PERL is right there at the command line, and makes it easy to dump a list of 3D point coordinates into a macro for creating or modifying parts. Yes, you can do the same stuff in windows, but I think we can all agree it's easier with Unix.

      Congrats Parametric Technology!

      --

    2. Re:Hasn't it already been ported? by gizmo_mathboy · · Score: 2

      I believe I remember reading that Unigraphics had ported to linux (or it might have been their lower end CAD package).

      But you're right on about having I-DEAS and other CAD packages on *nix. You can do an amazing amount of automation on the *unix platform that is a pain in the ass on Windows. I'm especially familiar about automating things for I-DEAS after working with for 5 years.

    3. Re:Hasn't it already been ported? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has been running unofficially on linux for years, just never actually released by PTC for 'marketing' reasons. Now they are releasing it for 'marketing reasons'.

      I mean it had to be easier to port from unix to linux than to windows.

      This will give the best of both worlds for pro-e users, stability and fast hardware.

  22. Pro/E doesn't impress me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pro/E is a horrible piece of software, with an archaic interface. Porting to Linux for them has more to do with winning seats back from other easier to use solid modeling software companies such as SolidWorks then really giving a rat's ass about the Linux community.
    Their file format is absolutely not open. They add quirks to the format as soon as some other company figures out how to read it. All Pro/E file converters break with each new revision of Pro/E. I understand that, when they save doubles they now encrypt them so no one else can read them.

    1. Re:Pro/E doesn't impress me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I can't believe they would try to expand their customer base when they could be answering newbie Linux questions on IRC. Capitalistic enterprises used to be cool, man, but then they sold out!

    2. Re:Pro/E doesn't impress me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old Menu Manager interface was fast, simple, and easy to use once you learned it. The more they iconified the damn thing the worse and more inconsistent it has become. Any sophisticated software is going to have a high learning curve, once you learn Pro/E the interface makes a lot of sense and you can work rapidly and without alot of fuss. The behavior of the company is another matter, I don't think any of their customers have very nice things to say about them. Too bad, they have a world class product on their hands and they're mucking everything up.

  23. Bad News for Sun? by Brackney · · Score: 1

    The company I used to work at made a substantial investment in Solaris boxen to run Pro-E. Comparably powered PC's can be had at a fraction of the price so I'm wondering if this bodes ill for Sun?

    1. Re:Bad News for Sun? by phoebus1553 · · Score: 1

      It definately does. Our company SELLS Sun and does much Pro/E work for a(THE) large skid steer manufacturer and we're switching away from Solaris boxes to windows just as soon as our purchaser gets the boxes ordered. Main reason? $20,000 sun boxes are barely comparable to $3500 Intel boxes. Now if only we could have waited another 6 months to make the switch, but our old Ultra2's are about dead now.

      --
      ----- - The beatings will continue until morale improves
  24. Why did this get modded up? by Steveftoth · · Score: 2
    Which is true, of course, if they have UNIX expertise in-house. MCSEs are a dime a dozen, but good UNIX admins are quite expensive. If you go the consulting route, you get screwed with huge fees. If you train your personell, you get screwed with long courses and a decent change they simply won't get it.

    Why is it that this gets modded up? Good MS admins are just as expensive as good unix admins, there's just more MS admins because of the way that MS built their software. When the only way to recover a computer is by reinstalling all the software, then yeah, you are going to NEED a bunch of disk monkeys to run around with CDs and hard drive images. But a good unix admin can do everything from remote, usually even if the user has hosed their system. (Thanks to a security model that is actually implemented!)

    1. Re:Why did this get modded up? by delta407 · · Score: 1

      Good MS admins are very hard to come by, because in my experience if they get good at Microsoft software -- actually understanding how it's supposed to work -- they get sick of it and switch to *nix. As much as people don't want to admit, Windows really is an inferior operating system that has no business in the data center. (Unfortunately, demands of Windows on the desktop may bring it in, but that can be minimized with tools like Samba.)

      In any case, I agree with you and I found your disk monkey comment amusing :-)

  25. If amd has anything to say about it... by Steveftoth · · Score: 1

    then soon, 64-bit will rule on linux as well. Then you'll have as many addressing bits as you can handle, is there really any reason to goto a 128-bit addressing mode? Well, maybe when they need to design chips that have 2^128 or more transistors. ;)

  26. Re:The GNU/Stallman diaries. Issue 1. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice work. But remember that in html, < is written < and > is written >. It's unfortunate, but html is an extension of ascii, so it has a few reserved symbols. Maybe you could write a Cheap Software Foundation utility to html-ize code automatically in your next issue?

  27. Way Cool! by LWolenczak · · Score: 2

    I have worked in the HMI/Systems Intergration Field, and there are really only two products used for design. Autocad for 2d work, and Pro/Engineer for 3d and serious acurate 2d work. The funny thing is, you can download a version of the package that is 100% free for nothing.... unless you don't want like 250 megs. True, you could order the cd for like 10 bucks. The only thing they require is that you keep registered with them. *shrug* My mom keeps trying to get me to use it so I stop looking for her Autocad R12 disks.

  28. Simply Awesome by the_mystic_on_slack · · Score: 1

    My university teaches a Pro/E based course, but thus far has only licensed it for our Sun machines. There has been a recent push to develop a Linux cluster on campus; this is just another step in the right direction. Additionally, we have found that the Windows version of Pro/E is extremely unstable.

  29. Look at Ansys: Pro-Linux since 10-01! by Real+World+Stuff · · Score: 1

    ANSYS, Inc.'s New ANSYS 6.0 Simulation Software Suite Compatible with the LINUX RED HAT 7.1 Operating System

    ANSYS 6.0 Coupled with the 32-bit Linux OS Provides Cost Efficiency and Enhanced Speed-to-Market
    Canonsburg, PA - October 31, 2001 - ANSYS®, Inc. (NASDAQ: ANSS), the global innovator of simulation software and technologies aimed at optimizing the customers' product development process, today announced that the new ANSYS® 6.0 simulation software suite is fully compatible with the Linux Red Hat 7.1 Operating System that features the Intel® Processor Family (IPF).
    The Linux OS provides ANSYS 6.0 users with a powerful, flexible and open-architecture platform that can use clustering technology to handle the super-computing loads required for simulation engineering applications. Linux provides ANSYS 6.0 users a reliable cost-effective, multiple-user support tool that provides engineers with a platform to share development efforts early in the process, decreasing the number of design iterations. Because the Linux system updates occur quickly and openly, users do not have to wait for new vendor updates or releases, saving ANSYS 6.0 users time and money.
    ANSYS 6.0 marks the first formal release for the Linux 32-bit OS. Future updates to ANSYS 6.0 are also expected to support the Linux 64-bit OS.
    "Our goal is to continuously provide ANSYS customers with state-of-the-art software solutions that are compatible with a variety of operating systems. Linux has quickly become a standard in many engineering environments and can provide ANSYS 6.0 users with the open architecture they need to complete their tasks in timely and cost-effective manner," stated Michael Wheeler, vice president of marketing for ANSYS, Inc.

    About LINUX OS

    Linux is a modern operating system that runs on 32-bit architecture, uses preemptive multitasking, protected memory, supports multiple users, and has rich support for networking, including TCP/IP networking. Linux runs all the applications a Unix server system should run, including web servers like Apache, mail serving software like Sendmail, and database servers like Oracle, Informix, or more open applications like MySQL and Postgres. Linux supports a wide range of file system types, and through programs like Samba can even seamlessly replace NT as a Windows file server. Through the use of clustering technology, Linux can scale up to handle the super computing loads required by many scientific/engineering applications, and required in high availability environments.


    About ANSYS, Inc.

    ANSYS, Inc., founded in 1970 as Swanson Analysis Systems, Inc., develops and globally markets engineering simulation software and technologies widely used by engineers and designers across a broad spectrum of industries, including aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics and biomedical. Headquartered at Southpointe in Canonsburg, PA, ANSYS, Inc. employs 400 people and focuses on the development of open and flexible solutions that enable users to analyze designs directly on the desktop, providing a common platform for fast, efficient and cost-conscious product development, from design concept to final-stage testing and validation. ANSYS, Inc. distributes its ANSYS®, DesignSpace®, AI* Solutions(TM) and ICEM-CFD Engineering products through a network of channel partners in 37 countries, in addition to its own direct sales offices in 18 strategic locations throughout the world. To address the latest in Web-based solutions, ANSYS, Inc. provides e-CAE, a solution designed specifically to address the need for "surge capacity" often required during the design verification phase, as well as providing a low-cost entry point for consultants and occasional users.


    CONTACT:
    Dawn Tappy
    ANSYS, Inc.
    PR Manager
    globalpr@ansys.com


    Note to editors: ANSYS is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks and registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

    --
    If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
    1. Re:Look at Ansys: Pro-Linux since 10-01! by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      But what he forgets to mention is that Ansys Designspace has an atrocious UI. That, and the fileformat which is bloated and quite closed off. Don't believe me? Give it a try, and you'll decide even Autocad is better :) Well, that's pushing it, but you get the point.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  30. Maybe I should calm down... by Steveftoth · · Score: 2

    That comment was a little off the hook. I need to get some prozac or something.

    1. Re:Maybe I should calm down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That comment was a little off the hook.

      Maybe "off the handle" as in "flying off the handle"?

      "off the hook" is ebonic for "good".

      Ummm, maybe it was a good comment. Or whatever.. nevermind.

  31. WooHoo! by func · · Score: 1

    This is awesome! I've got ProE running on my wintel box right now, and ProE was the 1 thing keeping me from moving to Linux for my work computer; now there's no reason at all for me to be running Windows. Nice.

  32. Lite version by Neil+Watson · · Score: 2

    This is good news. The CAD choices for linux are pretty bad but getting better. However, what about a lite version for those of us that just want to design our own desk and home office space? I've tried some of the open source projects out there and they are pretty bad. The simpliest concepts like scaling your drawing to fit on a paper printout are missing. VariCad is another commercial offering but again, it's too expensive for home use. I tried their demo but it wouldn't let me save my work.

  33. Could this software... by Skreech · · Score: 1

    Could this software benefit from oh, say, a beowulf cluster?

    /me is splattered with tomatos into oblivion.

    1. Re:Could this software... by dcp · · Score: 1

      Strangely this guy may not be a troll.

      I am a mech engineer, and the majority of my day is spent driving this software (I also the resident consultant).

      Pro/E has been trying to get their app to use several computers for a couple of years. They currently have a menu pick for "distrubited computing". It doesn't do any thing, but its there.

      At the pro/user conf. in Orlando (1998?)they had a cluster of Sun's machines running an analysis.

      Mechanica (the FEA package)is supposed to support multi-processors, but I don't have a mp box to test it on.

      Hopefully they get something working soon. We have bunches of boxes doing nothing most of the day, it would be nice to run some large simulatons/animations distributed.

    2. Re:Could this software... by Skreech · · Score: 1

      Strangely this guy may not be a troll.

      Sure I am.

      Seriously though, after posting I realized that the question was slightly valid. But I'm sure thats what every beowulf-cluster troller starts to think after a while.

    3. Re:Could this software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to buy an additional module to use the distributed computing functions, which are only useful for certain batch jobs or for computing NC code.

      I wish PTC would get on the horse and multi-thread their software, it would be nice to use the 2nd processor in the Octane.

  34. Re:The GNU/Stallman diaries. Issue 1. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not HTML LOlLol.

  35. For suppliers, it's all about cost. by SirTwitchALot · · Score: 1

    I work with a number of tier 1 and 3 automotive suppliers, and they always tell me the same thing when getting new equipment... The cost has to be as low as possible. I can't begin to say how many of my clients have switched from solaris or hpux to NT, intel hardware may not be as well designed, but it gets the job done at a much lower cost. Most of my clients could care less about the OS on the box (in fact, many prefer UNIX since most designers don't know it... keeps down on IM clients, P2P, and other time wasters at work.) Parts of Unigraphics (GM) are now available for Linux, if the rest was offered, along with Catia (Chrysler) I could see a large number of my clients switching. A port of ideas (Ford) would help too... but IMHO that product won't be around much longer.

    --
    Go away, or I will replace you with a very small shell script.
  36. Non-Windows version of solidworks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's probably no response because solid-works was started by a bunch of guys who used to work on pro-e who were frustrated the company wouldn't do a proper windows port so they started their own company... =)

  37. Would you switch? by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    PTC seems to be first in line to move the MCAD market to Linux. Good for them. Wonder how this will affect the other MCAD market segments. Will people switch?

    Maybe just the thought of this will encourage other ports.

    Their next generation of products will be built around the WildFire release of Pro/e. This is no big deal because it is in the press release. Interestingly though, they use the M$ IE components on win32 for their web enabled functionality, but use Mozilla for everything else.

    Someone around here said mozilla was an important project once... (they were right!)

    I think it is cool to see Mozilla being used in such a way. The fact that it was there and capable paved the way for a Linux port that will do anything the win32 one does. (Other UNIXes enjoy that now.)

    Makes you wonder why we need IE doesn't it?

  38. I was thinking... by Steveftoth · · Score: 1

    more off the hook as in extreme, not as in good.
    In context, it was ment to be extremely bad.

  39. Cadence for Linux by nortcele · · Score: 1


    There is pressure from many of the large companies to get some of this design software available for Linux. In the instance of Candence, it should have better performance on x86 machines than on Sparc, with the added benefit of cheaper hardware. Word has it that a version of Cadence for Redhat may be available early next year. The sticking point is that 64-bit is really needed for large layouts, so it might be a while before a stable kernel and cpu are available which Cadence will bless.

    1. Re:Cadence for Linux by linefeed0 · · Score: 1
      Well, Cadence is just a pathological support case, though. Many tales abound of clusters/labs not upgraded, forced to choose between old or expensive hardware, just to support Cadence. Their software/hardware compatibility matrix is a ridiculously detailed mess.

      Until recently, they didn't support Sloaris 8, thus preventing a lot of newer Suns (Blade 100/1000/2000) from being used. The Blade 100's are really important to education customers since they're cheap, even if they're slow.

  40. Your video card by ehiris · · Score: 2

    Yes, you can use your super expensive video card for something productive.

    That is where Will frag for bandwith starts making some sense.

  41. "There must be some fairly credible requests..." by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    There must be some fairly credible requests coming in for this to happen.

    All it takes is one request from someone who will purchase enough seats.

    IBM's Tivoli TME10 enterprise management suite (for all I know it's called something else now, but I'm too lazy to check) is supported on OS/2 primarily because of a single customer, the UK postal system. Everyone knew it would have to happen eventually, since IBM bought Tivoli and still had a strong commitment to OS/2 back in those days -- except, of course, for making it not suck. They didn't have that strong a commitment.

    Incidentally, the linux port of tivoli was originally done by a support engineer with too much time on his hands. Ah, the wonders of using CORBA and perl.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  42. FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    A Mercedes technician costs you more than a dweeb from JiffyLube...does this mean you should not buy a Mercedes?

  43. Poor SGI by dso · · Score: 1

    You really have to feel sorry for SGI. They were in the Linux game years before most companies but the software support wasn't there (PTC included). Now they axed all of their Linux services and hardware only to miss the boat.

    Combine this with Weta (sp) in New Zealand buying 150 shinny new Linux workstations, from IBM, and you really have to think that SGI didn't make a very smart business decision.

    1. Re:Poor SGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think Pro/E started out on SGIs.

    2. Re:Poor SGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until the last 10 years or so SGI was the only platform Pro/E was availble on, simply because no one else had the necessary graphics hardware. 1988, Pro/E on a Personal IRIS running IRIX, and the cost was unbelieveable, approaching a quarter million for the license and the machine. Times have changed quite a bit.

    3. Re:Poor SGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SGI is still in the Linux game. They pulled out of the x86 market, it was a bad decision to even enter. Shortly we should see some Linux/IA64 systems from SGI based on Itainum2 (McKinley). The official story is that IRIX/MIPS and Linux/IA64 are two separate product lines servering different needs. Check out oss.sgi.com, they are doing some great things for the OSS community. I'm glad to see them refocuing on IRIX/MIPS with an eye to incorporating IA64 processors into their NUMAflex architure(s).

  44. Re:Linux is becoming the default in ASIC engineeri by Hex+Rules · · Score: 1

    I've been seing some decimal on slashdot, which geeks hate. So I've been posting this reply. So, why are you using decimal here? Do you understand number bases? I think you don't, otherwise you would use hexadecimal. Repost in hexadecimal--you may use "0x" as a prefix or "h" as a suffix. Perhaps you can learn at this since it is possible you don't understand. Or perhaps you are too stupid to ever understand hexadecimal and will be stuck with decimal.

  45. Re:fp for CLIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you really fucked up

    clit = logged in

  46. This is a big announcement by mrm677 · · Score: 2

    This is the package as far as product design is concerned. Everything from cell phone housings to automobile engines are designed with ProE. Surely not every company uses it, but most do. Many of my friends are engineers at Fortune 50 companies. Most of them use ProE on Sparcs running Solaris. Some have converted to Windows, but the product was and is primarily designed for a Unix/X11 environment.

    1. Re:This is a big announcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would say that CATIA is currently the product for design and MSC/NASTRAN is the product for linear FEA. ProE has been losing market share (and money) recently, this may be a good move for them to regain some of their lost seats.

    2. Re:This is a big announcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ferrari uses Pro/ENGINEER to design/manufacture their F1 cars, nuff said.

  47. There is a lot of demand for Linux from engineers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a lot of demand for Linux from engineers but they are not the ones paying the bills. The ones who control the purchases don't even know that Linux is not some computer game.

    You must remember that we live in a Dilbert world with a lot of pointed hair bosses.

    Labview has had a Linux version for a while but no one buys it. I was told that there was a lot of demand for a version but when time came to buy it the purchases didn't materialize.

    It is also true that they don't push it much as virtually no one knows that it exists.

  48. well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you could put it on windows and then have the russians easily send a virus. they probably already know some of the code in NT anyway...

  49. Re:Top Notch Software ... by jkujawa · · Score: 2

    ... horrible place to work, though. I used to contract with them, as a unix administrator. It was a fun place to learn unix, but pretty incompetent with a lot of things. No centralized password scheme, etc.

    They had some really dirty tricks though. They'd hire Russian programmers for well under market, and hold their green cards over their heads. Working there as a contractor meant that you were basically mulch.

    I really learned to despise Irix on that job.

  50. Re:Linux is becoming the default in ASIC engineeri by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    "I have been in ASIC engineering for the past 11 years. I have seen things moving towards Linux as the underlying OS for the past 2-3 years."

    I have to agree that such a change is in the works. The Linux offerings in VHDL for VHISIC programming tools for linux are impressive. I am told I-DEAS has linux support now. (I have only run it on winnt machines but my univ has a HPUX lab running it as well.) And now Pro/Engineer as well.

    I think that this will make it easy for the high end design part of hightech industries to step away from MSFT so they can spend their time worrying about how to best do design tasks as opposed to manage and pay for restrictive licensing agreements. Still, I expect that office work will be done on Win32 for a long time yet, this change is a good start.

  51. Thought they already did it.. by Mike+Hicks · · Score: 3, Informative

    Huh?!? I thought I'd heard they were planning this back in 1998 or 1999. Oh well, better late than never, I suppose.

  52. Re:fp for CLIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yea, i noticed. fucking mozilla

  53. whats to admin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "but good UNIX admins are quite expensive"

    Any body who can admin a windows system can read a book about linux over the weekend and set a system up on monday. I did.

    We have three linux boxes in two locations. These boxes run month after month with no problems. I shut them down over the christmas holidays just to feel like I was doing something.

    1. Re:whats to admin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, *nix is not hard, but a lot of MCSEs really are clueless, and if it doesn't have dropdown menus and command buttons it must not be worth their time.

  54. FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about FreeBSD? I know lots of engineers who run FreeBSD as their prefered desktop.

    1. Re:FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HahahahaHAHAHAhahahaHAHAhaheeheeheehahaheheheHAHAH AHAHA...

  55. Java News by bubbaD · · Score: 0

    Last year, when I applied to the company, I got the impression that they were doing a lot of stuff in java, esp web services. This may or may not have to do with achieving platform independence, in which case Linux would be a logical step. Or maybe their newer products have suffered from lackluster sales.

  56. Great news! by tzanger · · Score: 2

    One baby step closer to getting a 2D/3D drafting program to Linux like AutoDesk Mechanical Desktop and Inventor.

    OrCAD for Linux would be great, although I've almost got SDT/PCB386 working under DOSEmu and VMWare. 800x600 with VMWare, 1024x768 for DOSEmu. :-)

    Possibly the only thing holding my office at Windows is MPLAB ICE 2000. The damn thing won't install under WINE but works great under VMWare or Win4Lin. Office is licked now that StarOffice is here and Mozilla or Konq does all we need for web browsing.

  57. Pro/Desktop Express by bdcowell · · Score: 1

    One of the big things PTC talked about when they did my company's release update session was their new "Granite" architecture. They released a new free/cheap modeler that's can handle Pro/E files and called it Pro/Desktop Express. It has some of the basic functionality of Pro/E. They explained it as being CAD for non-CAD people, to get more people using it. It's the "Free 3D cad software" mentioned on their homepage.

  58. OS costs are immaterial, Windows "good enough"... by aquarian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason these engineering packages moved to Windows from Unix in the first place is that it was so much cheaper. The advantage of NT was that you could run these apps on cheap, commodity hardware, and a relatively cheap OS. The alternatives back then were commercial, proprietary Unix on expensive workstations from SGI, DEC, HP, or whoever. NT boxes cost less than half as much, and could be run by the average office's "computer whiz" (or at least that was the perception).

    Since then, Linux has taken over, with the ability to run on the same cheap hardware. But now it doesn't matter as much- the savings are in the hundreds, rather than thousands, or tens of thousands per year, per seat. Compared to the cost of these apps and the salaries of the people using them, that's a drop in the bucket. Windows may not be cheap or good compared to Linux, but in the overall scheme of things it's cheap enough, and good enough.

  59. damn! it's payware!! by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, I certainly won't be using it, then!

    I can see the "Ask Slashdot" now: I manage a large aerospace machine shop and I'd like to run my shop on Linux. Is there an open-source 3D CAD/CAM program that will create NC programs that will properly control my 5-axis milling machines, lathes, and Okuma grinders? I hope to convince my managers this is a good idea!

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  60. Left out a huge one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The place I work at (large helicopter manufacturer) has about 1200 RS/6000 boxes, most of which run CATIA. Licenses can get awfully expensive.

  61. Re:OS costs are immaterial, Windows "good enough". by puetzc · · Score: 1

    I agree that the OS costs are immaterial, but I am not sure that I buy into the good enough. I struggle with the limitations of Windows every day. When I went from HP-UX to Windows, I lost virtual desktops, X11 remote logins (not for heavy duty work, but great from time to time), useful swap space (not just for multiple applications, but for an app that needed more RAM than I had), and the list goes on. I gained cheap hardware (works with Linux), MS Office (I can have Open Office with Linux), and - well I got support from IS if that is a gain. I don't know if IS can be open minded enough to give it a try, but I will be at the head of the line to sign up.

  62. ICEM by attobyte · · Score: 1

    I got word that ICEM is going to have a linux port also. They used to be owned by PTC but split off.

    --
    I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!

    Mike

    1. Re:ICEM by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

      Heard this also. They are getting a lot of requests from Europe. (Germany actually.)

      This might affect the use of Alias Studio in Pro/e shops that convert to Linux.

      No remote X11 on Alias products, so either they stay with commercial UNIX, win32 or use another alternative like ICEM.

  63. OH MY GOD!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is so amazing. I have worked for 3 different design corperations that have used *NIX for the main system and used VMWare or other emulators to make Pro Engineer work. In one year, in software alone we spent $100k on upgrades for Pro/E and then had to turn around and spend another $10k on windows upgrades. The ONLY thing on those machines that used windows was....you guessed it Pro/E. This is such a HUGE thing for Linux. Even though not many people use it, Engineers and designers do...let's just say this is going to make heads really start to turn. Now, if we could just get adobe to support linux it. If Adobe would join the ranks, there will not be any holding linux back.

  64. Master Series by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SDRC had a port working in house for Master Series/IDEA-S about 2 years ago. Unfortunately no one thought it was a good idea to try to and continue down that path.

    Like they say, the road to hell is paved with melted snowballs...

  65. Why would I want it on Linux by quade_79 · · Score: 1

    I admin a few of the boxes at the university where I go to school ¥SIUE© We use suns with Cadence© Now we get a HUGE break on the price of the cadence software© Generaly from what I've seen, the yearly contract costs of the software dwarf the cost of the boxes that it runs on, even semi-expensive SUN workstations ¥eg SunBlade 1000s© What is the big advantage of jumping ship from say a bunch of Sun workstations to some Intel boxes if it only results in a marginal reduction in cost© If I'm forking out 50k a year for software, what's the big advantage if I run it on $2k intel boxes verses $5k Suns, espically considering some of the advantages of the SUN boxes ¥64bit, tight integration of OS/Hardware, etc©©©?

    1. Re:Why would I want it on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI - your keyboard mapping is seriously messed up, at least for anyone using ISO-8859-1 (Western European).

      Open parens are yen symbols, close parens are beveled squares, and periods are copyright symbols.

  66. Someone who spent a few thousand hours on AutoCAD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And all I have to say is:

    You mean, there are people
    who actually used the menus
    and icons to do work? I was
    once amazed to see someone
    actually using the "enter"
    key, instead of the obviously
    superior "space" key, in
    AutoCAD.

    I used icons all the time,
    if by icons you mean pop-up
    icons that represented
    autolisp routines when the
    tablet ran off the screen.

    I still miss using a tablet.
    A mouse just isn't the same.

  67. Re:ACL's by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    Don't forget IRIX.

    BTW: SGI contributed their XFS filesystem bringing ACL support in the filesystem with SAMBA for Linux. (others may do this, but I am aware of XFS at the moment.)

  68. ProE taking themselves out of the research market by gevmage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's great that after several years of using the excuse of "we don't what Linux distribution to support", they're finally making the port to a Linux based OS.

    Unfortunately, this may be too little too late as far as academic users of the software are concerned. A couple of years ago, ProE files generated by the education version of the software started to not be capatible with the full version software, cutting off university research groups that wanted to be able to design things with ProE and have their files merged with bigger systems.

    I'm part of a research group that was fighting for our research collaboration with several other universities and national lab to use ProE for the design and integration of the sub-systems. However we lost the fight when it was realized that the educational version (cheap at $5k per seat) wasn't capatible with the super-duper version that the lab has.

    --
    Craig Steffen
    http://www.craigsteffen.net
  69. RE: Solidworks on Linux. by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    Not a bloody chance. They are married to the MFC and intergrated OLE application model forever. Building on this toolset (no matter how wise) is one of the keys to their business model.

    Anyone running MCAD on UNIX is a ripe target for them. Less informed shops that are feeling the one box and it had better be win32 pressure is their target.

    Leveraging the win32 intergrated applications is key to their gain in market share. (Which BTW is all they care about.)

    They want to be the MCAD extension to Office, not the best tool.

  70. Re:Poor SGI - not at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wrong. SGI did the right thing by getting out of the PC market. Nobody can make any money from PCs (other than Dell). PCs are so completely commoditized it just doesn't make any sense for a high-end systems vendor who competes with differentiated hardware to be in the PC business.

    The main reason that IBM/HP/Compaq do PCs is to retain account control in their big corporate accounts. They'll lose money on the PCs, but make money selling services and big servers.But because SGI is specialized in the technical and creative computing market, this account control strategy doesn't apply to them.

    They deserve credit for trying to deliver a differentiated Linux/Intel workstation, and they deserve credit for leaving this market when it proved not to match their business model.

  71. Autocad high-end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Autocad is a mid-level program, and does not stack up against the likes of Pro/E, Catia, I-DEAS, and so forth.

  72. Re:damn! it's payware!! by Lee+Cremeans · · Score: 1

    Yeah, we'll write it for you, just give us a couple of years to 1) raise interest in the project and get coders 2) design the thing 3) write it 4) make it talk to everything else.

    In the meantime, you'll just have to use hand tools. Sorry!

    -the management

  73. Re:Poor SGI - not at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree that SGI deserves credit for LEAVING the INTEL market, but not for entering it. Basically they turned chickenshit when HP teamed with Intel to help create Merced. Instead of continuing to push the envelope (at the time SGI was far far ahead of EVERYONE in the RISC game, and Intel was very far behind) they stopped developing the frontier and came out with an overpriced commodity clunker. This destroyed the once great and proud SGI.

  74. Re:"There must be some fairly credible requests... by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    Then the question is who?

  75. virtual reality capabilities? by vic20beta · · Score: 1

    Will it support vr easily?? I mean, integration with big 3d stereo projection screens and interaction with 3d input devices ? vic

    1. Re:virtual reality capabilities? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not on PCs. Grab a CAVE and an SGI Onyx3000, if you have the means I highly recommend it.

  76. Re:ProE taking themselves out of the research mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is rediculous (note that this is characteristic of PTC), the Educational version should not be prevented from working with the Commerical version, they both cost roughly the same. The Student version (I got my copy for $15 :)~ is incompatible with the Commerical version, which makes sense because it is only for learning/training. If you have a lot of money/influence you can get a module from PTC that will convert files saved with the Student version to standard Commerical Pro/E files.

  77. Re:Someone who spent a few thousand hours on AutoC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AutoCAD is a toy, I thought that only 3rd world companies used it, like some of our south american customers.

  78. On a similar note... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    does anyone know if this software is functional for civil/environmental engineering-type drafting? (Drainage systems, bridges, feed lots, that sort of thing). I've been looking for such a linux solution due to the immense time investment that Windows takes to administer, and am wondering if there is a product that is similar in feature and similar in function to AutoCAD 2000 (due to the monkey-like nature of most of the engineering technicals employed at the company I work for, it's necessary to have something that will not cost a lot to retrain them on.)

    Sorry if it's a bit incoherrent, it's been a long night and I'm exhausted.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:On a similar note... by LilSerf · · Score: 1
      Pro/E is functional for just about any type of mechanical design you'd like to do. PTC offers a huge array of libraries for special tasks (all for a price of course).

      The drawback is that Pro/E is really not that similar to AutoCAD -- the main difference is the fact that it's a parametric modelling system (closer to AutoDesk's Mechanical Desktop). You can design a part with several steps (rotating surfaces, quilting them together, beveling, cloning, whatever) and then go back and change a parameter of your initial solid. Pro/E will rebuild your model, following the steps you took originally, to create the new model. This keeps you from having to rebuild things from scratch when values change, and also helps if you need to generate many very similar models that differ only in size/rotation/etc.

      Anyway, from what I've heard, there's a definite learning curve going from AutoCAD to Pro/E, but I have yet to run into someone that didn't like Pro/E once they figured it out. It ain't cheap, though.

    2. Re:On a similar note... by RexRuther · · Score: 1

      This software is speciality software for solid modeling...similar but not the same. Basic AutoCAD is really just for drafting and creating drawings/renderings.

      There really isn't a linux based alternative to AutoCAD, at least in the civil/mechanical/electrical arena. Most of my clients expect either AutoCAD or Microstation drawing files which are both Windows only (AFAIK).

      Windows machines are not really harder to administer, just different. My advice is to use Win2000pro and lock down the boxes for the monkeys. :)

      --
      -"The early bird catches the worm, but the late bird sleeps the most"
    3. Re:On a similar note... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out www.varicad.com. It may fit some peoples needs.

  79. Pro/E was show at Linuxtag 2000 Germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Is remember Pro/E was at the SGI/Rand booth at Linuxtag 2000 Stuttgart/Germany. I was told that porting took them 11 days. But it took two years to hear of Pro/E again in the news.

    All I know is that the HOOPS3D Libary by Tech Soft America is used by Pro/E as in most other CAD software (IDEAS ,Solidworks etc.)

  80. Linux has reached critical mass ! by gp500 · · Score: 1

    This is what I've been waiting for. This proves that Linux is ready for prime time. Why ? The (mechanical) engineering market is huge. Take all the different software companies, and add up their value. Pro/Engineer, UGS/Sdrc(Unigraphics, Solid Edge, I-Deas), Autodesk(Autocad, 3Dstudio), Bentley(Microstation), Dassault Systemes(Catia, Solidworks), etc. Combined, they're one of the largest segments of the IT world. It's also got some of the most demanding customers. By releasing Pro/E for Linux, they're forcing everyone else to follow. It's just a matter of time before UGS launches Unigraphics for Linux. And what's next ? Imagine a large car manufacturer, like GM, or BMW. What's stopping them from running Linux on all their PC's ? Nothing. SAP is already there, FEM (Nastran) is there. Staroffice is ready. The way is paved for Linux from top to bottom. The irony of it is that it's not so long ago that these companies finished their transition from UNIX to windows, and now their going back !

  81. Re:OS costs are immaterial, Windows "good enough". by SDPlaya · · Score: 1

    Everything you described is something you can have with Windows -- well maybe not the X11 remote logins, but there is remote desktop, which is actually quite good.

  82. Now all we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is 3D Studio Max. When that day comes, I'll be one very happy camper.

  83. yeah, but... by Giant+Killer · · Score: 1

    when does it come out for OSX?

    actually, if i understand correctly, apple uses pro/E for all of their design work.

    -cowboy byscuits

  84. Great news by slide-rule · · Score: 1

    News of any Big Name (tm) 3D CAD software for Linux is huge in the engineering field. Where I work (as engineer in a large aerospace-industry company with infrequent-but-present CAD needs), we have been using Unigraphics on Solaris boxes. For whatever bone-head reason, couple years ago the entire company decided to begin replacement of several thousand Sun boxes with Dell/Intel solutions running W2K. The real geeks here amongst us made a good cry for putting Linux on the machines instead (save money, yes you can still get support, we still have Unix, no productivity drops, etc.) but, among many other "reasons" was one of the strongest motivators that Unigraphics (UG) didn't work under Linux but did under windows. Now, while the company deployment of and reliance on "UG" is large (so much so that there's no hope of switching to anything else; there is far too much inertia at this point), us pro-Linux guys didn't have too much come back for the pro-MS upper management point that there wasn't any top-of-the-line CAD packages for Linux. (As an aside for those interested, we are expected to be a fully-MS-campus by end of the year; already the amount of things that just don't work, courtesy of unknown coded limits in W2K and/or its basic non-Unix-ness, is enough to make you either laugh out loud or go cry in a corner.)

  85. Well, actually, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did send in essentially that very "Ask Slashdot" about a year ago when I was shopping for CAD software and saw prices up to $120,000 for crap with built in bugs to keep you coming back for "maintenance." This sort of professional application would be excellent for the Linux community, and could probably be funded by the machine tool manufacturers just to eliminate the bottleneck that current software places on their sales. You can spend more for the software than for the tools! So, yeah, why doesn't someone organize this?

    1. Re:Well, actually, by phrostie · · Score: 1

      Well, actually, we do have a group for users/developers of Cad on Linux. if anyone is interested in joining, please do.

      http://www.freelists.org/webpage/cad-linux

  86. It's a big deal because... by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 2
    it's the first (major) solid modeler to port to Linux. Not I-DEAS, nor CATIA, nor Unigraphics, nor AutoCAD (snicker) have a Linux solution. True that FEA products (MSC, etc.) have gone to Linux already, but solid modeling is still the cash cow, so this is a big damn deal.

  87. VBA support by mikey504 · · Score: 1

    I think about how nice it would be for AutoCAD to be available for linux almost daily. (It remains our only obstacle to a complete change over.) I think the major stumbling block at this point is that AutoDesk appears to be married to the visual basic development environment. I have a sneaking suspicion that many of the AutoCAD extensions out there are coded in visual basic, and AutoCAD has supported visual basic for applications ala Office, et al for quite some time now. It doesn't get less portable than that.

    I am assuming that the initial buy in was "look at all these nifty developer's tools we can offer you and your users". It would be very difficult to reverse that course now, but since we do all our customizations in LISP I wouldn't miss visual basic at all. I just can't GetPastTheGoofySyntax for VBA, and the first book I bought on it was peppered with lots of "for some reason, this doesn't always work" and "be careful calling this routine after that routine or your program may hang for a few minutes" so I put it down and never picked it back up.

    I just wish someone at AutoDesk would pay attention. Some video production shops are going linux, though, so maybe 3D Studio will be the first hole in the dam over there.

  88. Check your facts by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 2
    EDS bought both SDRC and UGS. Both companies are working furiously to build a unified product line, which will probably be branded Unigraphics, although modeling, FEA, and CAM will certainly have much in common with both products. I-DEAS isn't dead--it's still selling millions $ in new seats, and it will evolve along with Unigraphics into the new product line.

    As for Ford switching to CATIA, possible but not likely. After the fallout, there will be pretty much only 2 products controlling high-end CAD--EDS and Dessault. Every large consumer product/automotive/aerospace company will be evaluating both products continuously, I'd imagine. Pro-E? Not bloody likely. Check their stock--Ford or any other big auto name isn't going to invest $250+ million in an MCAD package that might flounder any day now. The big 3 (really big 5) are perfectly happy dealing with EDS and IBM (dessault's reseller).

    1. Re:Check your facts by siemce · · Score: 1
      well ... I-DEAS is going to be merged into Unigraphics.

      As per Ford insider news, the switch to CATIA is very likely possible.

  89. It's the support costs, silly by mikey504 · · Score: 1

    Operating system reinstalls, software that needs to be periodically uninstalled and reinstalled, uninstall routines that fail to complete the uninstall process, biannual hard drive reformats.

    Even if it were still necessary to occasionally clean the slate on a given unix, at least it would only be a matter of erasing some files and copying them back over.

    I bet the windows registry (and undocumented keys therein) costs us thousands of dollars in IT time a year.

    Right now I am installing operating system software on sixty desktops here. It would be so much easier if I could just do a simple "copy" of the relevant files from the network. Installation routines for Windows are a nightmare, and mystery errors requiring reinstalls are all too common.

  90. I Hope TurboCAD follows suit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TurboCAD Is a pretty decent 3d modeler, and a good 2d drafting program as well. It is way cheaper than AutoCAD ( and hence Pro/E ) but is a good work-alike. The modeler works similar to that in Pro/E where you basically sketch your primitives and then add dimensions to constrain them. I would love to see this for Linux, I'd buy it right now. That sad thing is it was originally CorelCAD, which if it still was there would definately already be a Linux version. It is a good program, uses OpenGL for interactive rendering, can export STL and 3DS files. _That_ is the one that I can afford and is good enough quality for most work.

  91. Re:Top Notch Software = Not cheap by Frederick+Paepke · · Score: 1
    FYI: "Several thousand $$ a seat" just about covers it. The last engineering shop I supported purchased 10 seats (with a few bells and whistles) for just about $22k USD per seat.

    That was in 1996. I can only imagine what the price would be today.

    But, dang, the engineers sure liked the functionality of the software!

  92. Re:Someone who spent a few thousand hours on AutoC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Note: This is the same AC that
    you were replying to....

    AutoCAD is a damn fine 2D
    drafting tool. I've never seen
    anything better.

    That is all it is, though, despite
    it's ambitions of being a real 3D
    modeling program.

  93. Just use Ghost, you big dummy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any shop I know who runs this kind of software has a standard configuration, which is installed from a hard drive image. Windows is only "installed" once, as are the other apps. Subsequent personal configurations are backed up periodically too. So if a system has a problem, a wipe/reinstall can be done in minutes. If it doesn't work, it's a hardware problem, and that could happen with any platform anyway.

    in practice, this is faster than actually troubleshooting and fixing any system, Windows or Unix/Linux.

  94. Re:damn! it's payware!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until the fix there unsubscribe script and get me off their damn bandwidth heavey newsletter, I'm not going to use it.

  95. Re: Solidworks on Linux. by Locutus · · Score: 2

    MFC... You're right, they ain't going anywhere but MS windows. They'll go down with them after all, I've NEVER seen Microsoft fight something as bad as they're fighting Linux. And it isn't because they didn't invent it, it's because they can't control it. Thanks for the heads-up on that other CAD companies tie to MFC.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  96. Re:OS costs are immaterial, Windows "good enough". by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2

    Everything you described is something you can have with Windows -- well maybe not the X11 remote logins, but there is remote desktop, which is actually quite good.

    I can tunnel one app from one unix box to another unix box without exporting the desktop. I can do this over the internet. I can leave a box running for 3 months and never reinstall apps. I can run the same source code on 3 different architectures with minimal changes. I can avoid giving money to a company that uses fear based tactics to make people pay for the same software 3 times.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  97. Re: Solidworks on Linux. by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    This is also another reason why Microsoft wants OpenGL *dead*.

    All of the major MCAD packages use OpenGL for their graphics render engines. OpenGL is good at this. Today I would wager that DirectX whatever version is good as well.

    Not an issue for the minor players, but the big boys are still cross platform.

    MCAD and high-end analysis packages run on the UNIX platforms and OpenGL enables this.

    BTW you can include on your list SolidEdge, Autodesk Inventor, IronCAD (or whatever they are calling it now), and CADKEY. Autodesk and CADKEY used to be UNIX based, but that ended in the early 90's with ACAD 12 (I think) and CADKEY 6 or 7.

    Basically all the midrange stuff out there right now is built using the MFC. All of it wants to be high-end CAD. None of it is going to be.

  98. Re: Solidworks on Linux. by Locutus · · Score: 2

    I'm aware of the "We wand OpenGL dead" line Microsoft has. OS/2 shipped with OpenGL way back in 1994 (OS/2 v3.0) and NT got it to. It was around that time that MSFT started their own 3D stuff. They only did DirectX because IBM had DIVE and showed Doom running full speed in a window on OS/2. All this was just like you said, OpenGL is not a Windows-only technology and MSFT does not own the API's. IE, they can't use them to keep the competitions applications a rev or two behind theirs.

    I think it was AutoDesk bought into Microsofts "write to Win32 and have Windows AND UNIX" way back when. Bristal,Mainsoft and a couple of others were allowed to licences MSFT code to enable Win32/MFC to run compile and run on UNIX. After a few big CAD companies ported from UNIX to MFC, Microsoft pulled the rug out from under the companies providing the underlying runtimes. I think Mainsoft was the only one left standing. Their sole existance is because then needed to show in court that Bristol wasn't being targetted. Only thing was, Microsoft charged MainSoft tons for their Windows source license but turned around and paid them big bucks to port IE to Solaris and HP(?).

    They are smart bastards but not technically, only business-wise. The world finally caught on that a networked computer must be peer2peer capable, secure, and robust(not crash daily). Microsoft windows is such a pig that it imploads under any reasonable load.

    BTW, I think AutoDesk realized the mud they are in and started porting a bunch of stuff to JAVA. Then Microsoft pulled the JAVA rug out from under them too (requires them to install the JVM now). JAVA may not be best for all apps but it's much easier going from Java to say Qt than MFC to ANYTHING.

    Looks like there's quite a self-imposed ceiling on these CAD companies and if they want to exist in 5 years, they had better get off of MFC soon. IMHO.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus