Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : SDRC - Structural Dynamics Research Corp. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: William B. Kohn who wrote (820)	7/20/1998 8:04:00 PM
From: Valen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 946

William - A few points: o Master Series is NOT 70's code...it was almost totally rewritten from the ground up in C for MS1, and more recently large portions are being rewritten in C++ using modern OO development techniques. Just because SDRC was selling software in the 70's does not mean that all of their products are still "70's code". Where do you claim to get this (incorrect) information??? o Why should the metaphor for an OPERATING SYSTEM be used inside of an application program, which has its own, completely different set of problems and requirements than the management of a computer desktop? True, there are some minor differences in terms of what "click" versus "shift-click" mean between Master Series and Windows, but most users probably perceive those as minor annoyances, not factors that would lead them to completely reject an otherwise capable package as the corporate design tool. o "Bill Gates" windows metaphor is really ripped-off from "Apple Macintosh" metaphor, which was actually invented decades ago at Xerox. Give proper credit where credit is due. Agreed, declining sales for MCAD product is definitely a concern, but you will need to abandon your simplistic and presumptive theories and look elsewhere for explanations. My $0.02: Availability of lower-end products are driving market to buy them and try them for a while to see of they will work. While they might have gotten more actual benefit from higher-end systems (Ideas and PE), they may be squeaking by, and be able pressure the lower-end MCAD suppliers to make improvements (as SDRC/PE customers did to them), and keep going at the lower price point. The job for SDRC marketing/sales is to convince and demonstrate substantial benefits from the more complete implementations of the high-end products that will have a clear bottom-line benefit over the low end, enough to make it worth the higher price for customers. That's especially hard to do when someone is only barely convinced MCAD is a good idea to begin with. The fact that BOTH SDRC and PTC's MCAD sales are way off supports this industry-based analysis, over the particular strengths and weaknesses of the individual products. My guess is that both will be forced to reconfigure their product/price/market model, and sell their high-end products for less, or pack more of the high-end functionality into the low-end products. I've heard rumors that SDRC may be doing this with the next release of their Artisan, which runs (quite well I've heard) on Windoze NT.

To: William B. Kohn who wrote (820)	7/21/1998 8:24:00 AM
From: Jerry Rush	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 946

William, its obvious you were right about the CAD business being soft. I thought SD was gaining market share there. I was wrong. But you know, there is something about this we may have all been missing. SD didn't start out as a CAD company. They were a consultant outfit. Their business has always been to provide solutions for their customers. Customers needed better CAD software, they assembled a suite to do that. Now their customers need PDM. And it is being furnished. The key here, at least in my estimation is this: They provide a service to their customers. The best way to be successful is to find a need and fill it. SD's approach has been, What do you need? We'll find a way to provide it. And that attitude has SD ahead of the competition in PDM. So maybe we need to quit thinking of them as a CAD company. Instead, as a provider of solutions to business. The beautiful thing about this is that it removes the limit on what the company can do. Leaves them free to keep looking for that need that appeals to be filled. At todays price, the whole business is valued at about $10 ($4 cash). Thats less than the sales per share. Undervalued? Jerry

To: William B. Kohn who wrote (820)	8/21/1998 5:48:00 PM
From: roger hall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 946

I just got on this thread, so bear with me if someone has already responded. SDRC's code is pretty strong in my opinion and is not '70s code (did CAD even exist in the '70s?). They have gone to great lengths to rewrite their code, and as a user, I'm satisfied with their recent efforts, especially with version 6 and their plans for version 8. Version 5 is sound. From a usability and capability standpoint, they're code ranks among the very best I've seen, and I have over 16 years experience as an engineer and as a CAD user. I don't see SDRC faltering in the future in the CAD/CAM arena unless a new player comes in to blow all competition away. Right now, their chief competitor is PTC, and in my opinion, THEIR code is archaic and needs to be completely rewritten. Their code works, but I see no future hooks like vgx coming from them. My 2 cents.