Land Rover 和 Volvo 汽车公司 —— Ford Motor Company的一部分 – 目前使用IBM 的Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) 系统。 Ford 将集成这些系统，使其进入到他们的下一代C3P (PLM) 系统环境中。
“Ford’s selection of IBM and Dassault Systemes’ technology demonstrates the power of our full PLM portfolio to help companies improve their product creation processes and better integrate the complex series of steps that advanced manufacturing requires," said Ed Petrozelli, General Manager, IBM Global Product Lifecycle Management. " This is why PLM is one of the cornerstone applications in IBM’s strategy to help enterprises like Ford become true ‘on demand’ businesses.”
“Ford’s decision for CATIA and ENOVIAVPM[$#8482] solutions will give Ford the agility required to respond dynamically to changing customer demand,” said Bernard Charlès, president and CEO, Dassault Systemes. “V5 provides an enterprise-wide collaborative development environment that fosters innovation, shortens development cycles, and increases flexibility.”作者: darkhorse 时间: 2003-2-11 09:36
呵呵～是不是感觉很爽？作者: hongshan_chen 时间: 2003-2-11 11:10
福特用catia作为车身设计，继续用升阶i-deas NX到NX作文车内和底盘设计并且扩充teamcenter作为主线。
Ford spokesman Paul Wood told Reuters the idea of using both EDS and IBM was to "become consistent with our brands around the world ... and from that drive synergies and reduce costs."
EDS' I-deas and Teamcenter products will be used by Ford to design its vehicles' interiors. Ford further expanded the relationship by selecting EDS to store all the automaker's product design and parts data worldwide, said Bill Carrelli, president of EDS' product business strategy and marketing. (Additional reporting by Justin Hyde in Detroit)作者: Raymond Smith 时间: 2003-2-11 17:51
Pro-E跟CATIA根本不是一个档次的软件。Pro-E也就算中档软件，算不上高档。唯一能跟CATIA抗衡的仅剩UG了，Pro-E早已出局。可笑那么多Pro-E的痴心人只知道看自己的优点，不知道看别人的优点。做人也是这个道理，对待世界其它大国跟中国的对比评价也是这个道理，不能认为只有自己是勤劳，勇敢，智慧的。还是早点拥有自知、知人之明的好，早点开始学习别人长处、开放、合作，否则等大梦初醒，可能为时已晚，已经历被淘汰不远了。作者: zwl 时间: 2003-2-17 17:49
福特汽车坚持多CAD的下一代C3P系统战略
作者：[ 中山力 ] 来源：[ 日经BP社 ]
但是在汽车行业，集团化进程正在全球范围内展开，英国陆虎（LandRover）和瑞典沃尔沃公司等将达索和IBM公司的CAITA用作骨干CAD的汽车制造商也已经加入福特集团。为了实现整个集团的高效运作，就必须要有能够满足整个集团要求的C3P系统。但是要想把目前的C3P系统应用于陆虎和沃尔沃公司，就必须进行大规模的系统置换。福特汽车由此判断在C3P系统中采用多种CAD不失为上策。 作者: o-o 时间: 2003-2-17 18:26
看来福特是采取折衷的策略了，谁也不得罪！
但对这个结果EDS肯定是不会满意的，因为本来福特都是采用I－deas的，这也是EDS能够收购Ideas的主要因素，但现在变成了IBM和EDS 平分天下，有可能IBM的前景还要好些，所以总的来说应该是IBM满意，而EDS不满意。
或者说IBM是大赢家，而EDS是小赢家作者: zwl 时间: 2003-2-17 18:50
很难说，IDEAS仍是福特的CAD标准，“只是英国陆虎（LandRover）和瑞典沃尔沃公司等将达索和IBM公司的CAITA用作骨干CAD的汽车制造商也已经加入福特集团，为了实现整个集团的高效运作，就必须要有能够满足整个集团要求的C3P系统。但是要想把目前的C3P系统应用于陆虎和沃尔沃公司，就必须进行大规模的系统置换。福特汽车由此判断在C3P系统中采用多种CAD不失为上策。 ”作者: zwl 时间: 2003-2-17 18:53
福特汽车公司不仅确认而且将继续扩展对EDS PLM Solutions软件的应用，并承诺将EDS公司的PLM产品作为福特汽车全公司数字化产品开发标准作者: opengl 时间: 2003-2-18 09:29
https://www.plmsolutions-eds.com/global/cn/pressroom/2003/feb/index.htm作者: jut 时间: 2003-6-4 15:59
CATIA发展前途不可限量作者: fangj0001 时间: 2003-6-4 23:22
地球人都知道CATIA的优于UG,UG优于PRO/E,作者: zchun 时间: 2003-6-5 12:30
这是个好消息作者: shairlin 时间: 2003-6-5 13:28
哎，我放弃PRO/E还是真确的作者: tsinghua64 时间: 2003-6-5 13:52
可是，如果我要放弃的话
又不知道该从哪里开始
郁闷。。。。。。。。作者: chenqa 时间: 2003-6-11 10:30
Rumors and conjecture have finally become reality as Ford Motor Company announces that they have chosen Catia V5 (CAD software) and Enovia (VPM) for their design and manufacturing processes worldwide.
Note: the following news item was taken from Reuters.
IBM Inroads at Automaker Ford Deals Blow to EDS
Wed February 5, 2003 07:21 PM ET
By Siobhan Kennedy
NEW YORK (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. said on Wednesday it won a key computer services contract with Ford Motor Co, breaking the long-standing grip of rival Electronic Data Systems Corp. among top U.S. auto makers.
Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed but IBM said Ford would purchase between 4,000 and 5,500 copies of IBM's [Catia V5] software used by computer-based product designers.
IBM also said it will provide lucrative consulting services and support as part of the multi-year deal. For every $1 of software sold, IBM typically reaps about $5 in consulting fees, said Ed Petrozelli, general manager of IBM's global product lifecycle management division.
Up until now, Ford had largely used software from a company called SDRC to design its vehicles. But after SDRC was acquired by EDS -- whose former parent and biggest customer is General Motors Corp. -- rival Ford got the jitters, analysts said.
"Immediately Ford started getting a little anxious about EDS controlling its product design infrastructure," said Kevin Prouty, an analyst with AMR Research in Boston, adding that the deal with IBM amounted to a "big crack" in EDS' stronghold in the U.S. automotive industry.
"This is Ford saying we are not going to be an EDS shop. We are going to use IBM in a strategic way on par with EDS," Prouty added.
Ford spokesman Paul Wood told Reuters the idea of using both EDS and IBM was to "become consistent with our brands around the world ... and from that drive synergies and reduce costs."
Ford, the No. 2 U.S. automaker behind General Motors, is in the middle of a turnaround plan aimed at producing $7 billion in annual pretax profits by mid-decade. It has vowed to pull get there through new models, requiring ever-shorter design cycles and more extensive parts sharing.
Automakers are trying to improve quality and productivity by more extensive computer modeling of vehicle assembly, seeking to fix problems before machinery is installed and factory workers are trained.
The news is another setback for EDS which is struggling to rebuild its image as a top computer services provider after a string of high-profile contract losses, a huge profit shortfall in the third quarter and a resulting U.S. government probe.
EDS, which plans to report fourth-quarter results on Thursday, has said its earnings in the period will suffer from the bankruptcy of United Airlines.
Under the terms of the deal Ford will license IBM's product design software, which is developed in conjunction with French software shop Dassault Systemes. The software, called Catia, will be used principally to design the body and exterior of Ford vehicles.
EDS' I-deas and Teamcenter products will be used by Ford to design its vehicles' interiors. Ford further expanded the relationship by selecting EDS to store all the automaker's product design and parts data worldwide, said Bill Carrelli, president of EDS' product business strategy and marketing. (Additional reporting by Justin Hyde in Detroit)
MY OPINION: EDS and their hybrid UG/IDEAS (NX) will only be around long enough for Ford to make the transition to Catia V5. It makes absolutely NO sense for Ford to use UG/IDEAS (NX) for interiors, and/or chassis, and Catia V5 for body structure and external panels. If Catia V5 has the surfacing capabilities to do Class A surfacing on exterior panels, why wouldn't they use it to design the interior. Class A surface is class A surface, right? If Catia V5 has the capabilities to design the body structure, why wouldn't they use it to design structural components in the interior and chassis??? I'm unaware of any other major OEM doing anything like this. Didn't Ford learn their lesson with the their past CAD software (SDRC) debacles???
Out of necessity, we were forced to work with two CAD systems at Saturn several years ago. The body designers came from GM and were familiar with CGS. The Vehicle Interior Systems (VIS) group benchmarked several CAD systems and chose Catia (V2 at the time). Trying to work with two separate CAD systems was a complete mess. The only way to get CGS data into Catia, and vise versa, was through an IGES translator. The translated data was garbage; barely usable to perform menial design tasks. Saturn finally switched to Catia 100% across-the-board in the early 90's. Unfortunately, when Saturn was assimilated into GM in the mid-to-late 90's, they were forced to switch to Unigraphics, which had replaced CGS as GM's corporate CAD system. At the time, Unigraphics was clearly inferior to Catia (V4 by then) and no one at Saturn was happy with the move. Many of my former Saturn colleagues are still grumbling.
I'm not an expert on software development by any means, but from what I understand Unigraphics and Catia V5 do not share the same core architecture. Thus, they are NOT interoperable. As of this writing, there are no built-in "save-as" translators. As such, IGES, STEP, or 3rd party translation software will be required for the two CAD systems to share data. One of the strengths of modern CAD software is the ability to retain a parts history, thus making it very easy to make downstream changes. Parts translated via IGES or STEP translators do not retain their history. Thus rendering the parts as "dumb solids" or "dumb surfaces". Such was the case nearly 15 years ago at Saturn. 3rd party "feature based" translation software is getting better, but at it's best it is not as cost effective, efficient, or as accurate as native data that requires no translation.
So why would Ford choose to use two CAD systems when they've just chosen one (Catia V5) that can do it all? The only reason that makes any sense is that Ford is buying time so their designers and engineers can get up to speed on Catia V5. In my estimation, Ford could not risk any bad blood with EDS at this critical stage by telling them they are being eliminated. To do so would be to risk losing EDS' "enthusiastic" support on current programs. Ford cannot afford to put themselves in that position. They need EDS onboard during the transition faze. And how long will this transition period last? Not as long as you might think. Despite the fact the Catia V5 announcement came on February 6th 2003, my sources tell me that Ford has been working with Catia V5 for quite some time now (as reported on this website nearly two years ago).
The next question is whether General Motors will be next to jump on the Catia V5 bandwagon. Consider the following; Bob Lutz, formerly of Chrysler Corporation and regarded as "the father of the Dodge Viper", has joined GM as Vice Chairman of Product Development. And which CAD software is Bob Lutz most familiar with??? (Hint: CATIA) Also, one of my former Catia V5 students has recently taken a job at GM doing data translations. She tells me that the department she's working in (at GM) already has Catia V5 workstations and that they were very pleased that she has already had Catia V5 training. Hmm...I wonder why?
These are my thoughts, what are yours? If you'd like to share your opinion, please send me an email at keith@practicalcatia.com.