Yes, that's right. Back then,
Posted: Mon Dec 23, 2024 9:26 am
So, at first the need for this data transfer connector arose specifically among your large customers who worked with Smart3D, Aveva E3D and Tekla Structures?
there was a big problem with transferring information between different systems and versions of differen phone number indonesia catalogs even within one company. That's why we initially used PlantLinker for internal processes and transferring objects from one project to another. And we didn't think about creating a CAD system until 2019. But over time, when we began to understand that our technology works, our appetite became bigger and bigger. True, Russian customers did not quite understand why they needed a new product when they already had their own processes and solutions that had been working for 5-10 years.
However, at that time, the price of popular Western solutions began to rise very sharply. It turned out that buying one workstation could bankrupt an average company. And besides, you had to pay for support, even if you did not use the system. Aveva went so far as to simply disable licenses for non-payment. Intergraph had a more lenient licensing policy, but it was still quite expensive. Therefore, Russian companies began to think about renting them or somehow reducing the number of workstations.
And we came up with an idea for such an interesting offer for customers: "Do you need to use Smart3D in your project? Buy a couple of Smart3D licenses and 10 PlantLinker workstations for modeling and collaboration."
If I understood you correctly, the PlantLinker connector has turned into PlantLinker CAD? And can we say that it has become possible to model industrial objects using the developments that were in Smart3D: catalogs of elements, fittings, equipment?
Once again, anyone who has worked with large Western companies knows their culture and closed, somewhat aggressive nature. Aveva sold its products only through its own sales channels. And Intergraph distributed its products through partners in only two countries - Russia and Brazil.
And if we had started to present our system as a replacement for their solutions, it would have caused a strong reaction. So we were very careful in our statements at that time and presented PlantLinker only as a technology for transferring data between systems. And we received positive feedback, including from Intergraph's top management.
In other words, you offered your PlantLinker system not as a replacement for Smart 3D and Aveva E3D solutions, but as a complement and joint use with these software products?
Not quite. The main idea was still the possibility of object-based transfer of information between different systems, since XMpLant had simply disappeared by that time.
Let's talk about your PlantLinker system. Is it possible to issue design and working documentation according to Russian standards with its help today? It is known that for engineers working in Aveva E3D and Smart 3D software, this was problematic.
I will say this: very often in Russia, in a huge number of companies, they first actually design on a flat system (AutoCAD, nanoCAD, KOMPAS), and then, at the customer’s request, they lift a 3D model from the drawings and give it to the customer.
Until 2022, we looked with horror at the release of design and working documentation and said that we would not do this.
However, in 2021, we started thinking about creating a sketching system within the company. For what purpose? Very often, for example, a technologist and a builder need to exchange various information when working on a 3D model. And these specialists need to quickly release not a drawing, but a sketch for internal use.
there was a big problem with transferring information between different systems and versions of differen phone number indonesia catalogs even within one company. That's why we initially used PlantLinker for internal processes and transferring objects from one project to another. And we didn't think about creating a CAD system until 2019. But over time, when we began to understand that our technology works, our appetite became bigger and bigger. True, Russian customers did not quite understand why they needed a new product when they already had their own processes and solutions that had been working for 5-10 years.
However, at that time, the price of popular Western solutions began to rise very sharply. It turned out that buying one workstation could bankrupt an average company. And besides, you had to pay for support, even if you did not use the system. Aveva went so far as to simply disable licenses for non-payment. Intergraph had a more lenient licensing policy, but it was still quite expensive. Therefore, Russian companies began to think about renting them or somehow reducing the number of workstations.
And we came up with an idea for such an interesting offer for customers: "Do you need to use Smart3D in your project? Buy a couple of Smart3D licenses and 10 PlantLinker workstations for modeling and collaboration."
If I understood you correctly, the PlantLinker connector has turned into PlantLinker CAD? And can we say that it has become possible to model industrial objects using the developments that were in Smart3D: catalogs of elements, fittings, equipment?
Once again, anyone who has worked with large Western companies knows their culture and closed, somewhat aggressive nature. Aveva sold its products only through its own sales channels. And Intergraph distributed its products through partners in only two countries - Russia and Brazil.
And if we had started to present our system as a replacement for their solutions, it would have caused a strong reaction. So we were very careful in our statements at that time and presented PlantLinker only as a technology for transferring data between systems. And we received positive feedback, including from Intergraph's top management.
In other words, you offered your PlantLinker system not as a replacement for Smart 3D and Aveva E3D solutions, but as a complement and joint use with these software products?
Not quite. The main idea was still the possibility of object-based transfer of information between different systems, since XMpLant had simply disappeared by that time.
Let's talk about your PlantLinker system. Is it possible to issue design and working documentation according to Russian standards with its help today? It is known that for engineers working in Aveva E3D and Smart 3D software, this was problematic.
I will say this: very often in Russia, in a huge number of companies, they first actually design on a flat system (AutoCAD, nanoCAD, KOMPAS), and then, at the customer’s request, they lift a 3D model from the drawings and give it to the customer.
Until 2022, we looked with horror at the release of design and working documentation and said that we would not do this.
However, in 2021, we started thinking about creating a sketching system within the company. For what purpose? Very often, for example, a technologist and a builder need to exchange various information when working on a 3D model. And these specialists need to quickly release not a drawing, but a sketch for internal use.