calling Mr Dynabits... : )

I see you have a new 'free' macro on your site- Sketchfile- thanks for
making it available to SW users. My question is about the nominated update
to extend to surfaces -will you be be making that 'free' also rather than
continue your maths addin - which apparently no one buys-?
I could probably make use of this capability sometimes but I would feel
slightly opportunist in picking up something by default you have spent time
developing.
That probably sounds a little odd to say but I wouldn't want you to miss out
on some return for your efforts, human nature being what it is donations may
be scarce......

 

I made it by request on this group, see the "Curve Through Free Points
Enhancement" thread.
It is brand new, I will advertise a bit more in the next days.

Right. It will even be better, allowing "self intersecting surfaces"
(in fact it will split the surface in surfaces that do not intersect)

Kind of you. The "sometimes" is the problem. Nobody would purchase a program
to use it "sometimes".
I was thinking about a "pay per use" approach that would charge users 1$-5$
each time they use an add-in but:
1) users would have to pre-pay
2) companies don't like to pay directly by credit card, without the usual
offer-order-delivery-invoice papers
3) licensing system would be web-based, and pretty hard to make it safe and
reliable

So I prefer that you pay what you want when you want, if you can. It's just
simpler.

Donations are as scarce as sales, but they require no effort in licensing,
protection, update management, support...
Let me tell you one thing I learned in 4 years : rogramming SW add-ins is
definitely no business.
The more I spend time on such things, the more I understand why it takes
years to SW corp to implement "enhancements" request : ROI < 0.
They implement those that competitors offer, and purchase or rewrite add-ins
from "partners".

So now I do it for fun besides some contracts. But I feel I won't have fun
much longer...

 

well I appreciate your efforts.I am sure many people do.
im kinda sorry things like this are hard to make pay their way.
im looking forward to the surfacing tools you mention : )
I will be sure to make you a donation !

 

Kind of disocuraging, since I am about to launch my own. Too late to stop now!

 

I can't say that this surprises me much. There are some nice add-ins
around, but as you admit, most are the kind that someone would only
use occasionally which minimizes their sales potentials. I wonder if
any of the lower echelon SW add-in vendors are generating much cash
flow from their programming efforts. Stefan Berlitz comes to mind.
His products are great (yes I have purchased them) but I very
seriously doubt the the income generated by his product support him.

I am a photographer and use a product called iMatch from Mario
Westphal (www.photools.com). IMatch is regarded through the digital
photography arena as being the best, most configurable photo file
management system out there. Unfortunately Mario has sold something
like 1,000 copies of iMatch (at $50 per copy) in the years it's been
out and can in no way support himself from it's sales. This is a
sideline for Mario. So it's not just the SolidWorks community that
suffers from these issues.

Well, you certainly have been a positive contributor to the SolidWorks
community and if you drift off, you will be missed. but I can
certainly understand the need to make a decent living.

Good luck and Happy New Year!

 

You are right, the fees from the licenses helps with online
costs, webspace and there is also some extra money left for
a new TFT monitor or even a new computer every year.

BUT I do this completly in my sparetime and almost for fun,
to make my living I have a job which occupies another
50 hour a week, fortunately with SolidWorks (I'm CAD admin).

I also maintain the german SolidWorks helppage and moderate the
german webforum at www.cad.de , and for in about 5 years
now there have been 0 (null, zero, nothing) donation in form
of money, which would help paying the bills.

So I decided to take a license fee at least for my major tools
like PAC4SWX; I think this pays what I have invested (if I don't
count my time) and some extra bucks on top, but I wouldn't even
been able to live from all generated income from 2 years for more
than 6 weeks.

So for me it's okay, as it is a kind of extra money I get for
a passion (the programming), but to make a living you have to make
projects especially for some customers on a regular base.

All the best to TheTick, hopefully you will get it working.

Bye,
Stefan

 

I did it. SketchFile can now build surfaces from structured points files.
Kind of "Surface from XYZ points" function...
Did not test much yet... Will improve it as feedback and SAMPLES come in.
But since it is a macro, it is Open Source and you can help too, right ?

MathSurf is dead as a product, but became a free macro that combines with
SketchFile to generate points files from mathematically defined curves and
surfaces. It is pretty basic right now.. Will be improved in the next days.
Here again, any feedback / suggestion is welcome.

And don't forget the PayPal button....

 

forgot the link : http://www.dynabits.com/sw/free/sketchfile/index.htm

 

unfortunately your link is to a largely blank page Philippe.....

 

damn... website crash... takes 4 hours to upload everything again....

 

Sorry to hear your lack of success selling SW add-ins, Philippe. I guess
you make a living out of the contract work? Like The Tick, I'm not far from
launching my first add-in, so, of course, I'm interested in what you have
written. Here in Cambridge, England, I know of some individuals who made
quite good livings starting CAD companies, but all of them made their money
selling technology to the large CAD vendors, or through consultancy. I
guess, writing add-ins is a good way to develop core technology, but
ultimately one needs the marketing muscle of a large vendor to extract value
from that technology; for example, SolidWorks "partners" selling to
SolidWorks. However, having only one potential buyer, SolidWorks, doesn't
put one in a strong position to negotiate. So I am thinking one way to go
is to develop core technnology that has value outside of SolidWorks and that
could, if desired, be integrated into multiple CAD systems.

Is your CADOO framework a success from a business point of view? Do you
find that it helps you win consultancy work?

 

Yes, CADOO is the foundation and masterpiece of all my SolidWorks software
(www.cadoo.com)
It's really a "high-level API", anyone doing some serious add-in project
should have something like this.
I didn't really push it on the market yet, but planned to make it sexier and
sell it this year.
Interested ? I'd love to go to Cambridge once more...

 

Hey, I'm a short of cash like you, so I couldn't afford CADOO right now!
(After debugging a COM reference counting crash for weeks where the only
call stack is a FEEEFEEE from SolidWorks itself, I think I would need source
code.) I think your prices are reasonable though, but selling to established
companies with cash whose core competence is engineering rather than
compsci/maths.

As you say though, if you are serious about add-ins, then you do need a
framework. I have developed something a bit like yours for my own use using
STL Port, boost, smart pointers etc. Components/frameworks always seem like
a good idea from a development point of view, but the ongoing costs of
documenting and supporting a substantial API like CADOO seem high to me. It
looks like you have gone about it in the right order though, developing
applications first, and then refactoring the framework as you go along. At
least then you know your abstractions are good for developing at least some
applications. I guess if you are selling the framework as part of a package
including consultancy, then it starts to make more sense