RE: [SLUG] Re: OT - CAD vendors advising customers to outsource

From: Ken Elliott (kelliott4@tampabay.rr.com)
Date: Thu Oct 28 2004 - 21:21:00 EDT


Brian, you might want to re-read my post. I'm afraid you missed the point.

KE>> "PTC executives boasted to financial analysts that they are advising
companies to replace $100K/yr American engineers with $20K/yr Indian
engineers."

It says PTC is telling their _CUSTOMERS_ to outsource. It's bad enough the
PTC and other CAD companies outsource, but suggesting to customers that they
do so is distasteful to me. Thus I referred to this as "crap".

B.S.>>It does 3D for simulation, modeling, packaging and component layout
far better than that "popular civil engineering" application

"civil engineering application" Hmmm.... That would be inRoads, EaglePoint
or ArcInfo, right? :-)

AutoCAD? I'm confused that you would compare the two. Isn't it a bit like
comparing PageMaker to Word? AutoCAD is easily the best all around drafting
package there is. It's the Swiss army knife of CAD. It does 3D, but it is
not a strength. But there are so many plug-ins, you can do almost anything.

Pro/E is a solids modeling system purely focused on mechanical design. It's
like comparing a Jaguar F1 car to a Honda Accord. Totally different
applications.

And just like Jaguar in F1, PTC is getting its but kicked by its
competitors. PTC should be more worried about Catia at the high end and
SolidWorks at the low end.

Ken Elliott

=====================
-----Original Message-----
From: slug@nks.net [mailto:slug@nks.net] On Behalf Of Bryan J. Smith
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:25 AM
To: slug@nks.net
Subject: [SLUG] Re: OT - CAD vendors advising customers to outsource
--outsourcing works, when limited

On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 07:14, Ken Elliott wrote:
> >From upFront.eZine:
> <quote>
> CAD vendors are emphasizing outsourcing to their customers.
> That's to sell more software, and especially to create a market
> for collaboration software.
> Last Friday, we listened as PTC executives boasted to financial
analysts
> that they are advising companies to replace $100K/yr American engineers
> with $20K/yr Indian engineers. It occurred to us that maybe nearly
> all
of
> its employees -- and those of any other software company -- could get
> outsourced enmasse to India, Russia, China, wherever -- software
> programming, marketing and public relations, IT and tech support,
> accounting, whatever. All an American software company needs in
> the United States is a ceo and local resellers.
> </quote>
> I've always had a dislike for PTC for this kind of crap.
> PTC makes a product known as Pro/Engineer or Pro/E.

And you think PTC is the _only_ vendor doing it?
Major software is already being developed overseas.
Heck, India is "expensive" compared to Ireland and Israel, among others.

What comes to bite companies in the @$$ is when they let _all_ of the code
be developed overseas. That's a problem because the end-user software is
_still_ used by Americans. Locale, business and other considerations are
still a factor. Those are approaches, flows and other features that _must_
be "added" when the product comes back.

I've written requirements documents for software being outsourced. You have
to tell these guys _everything_ -- right down to the data format,
interfaces, etc... They will cut corners if you don't, you have to put it
in the design document. So, unfortunately from a business standpoint, there
_is_still_ a "threshold of overhead cost" in doing this, as well as "fixing
the code" when it comes back.

So here's the golden key.
American companies _do_ need a better approach outsourcing software
development. It's not the "hand it off savings" like many companies want,
and they _are_ learning the "hard way."

One, project management is US based. You _can_ have a remote project
manager, but you need someone who reports to US engineering resources.
The US based portion defines requirements explicitly, and dictates what
portions -- and I stress _portions_ -- of the code will be written by the
outsourced partner. Strict function and parameters definitions, strict
structure and data formats. In fact, it really helps to have support files
and documents written _before_ you outsource.

[ SIDE NOTE: Unfortunately, I've seen companies abuse their developers,
sending an American developer to Indian for a projected 3 weeks only to end
up 3 months. That's just cruel, unprofessional and wrong -- I don't blame
American engineers for quitting, and I _do_ want to see some lawsuits ]

Two, you still need an engineering staff in the US. This staff will be
responsible for "cleaning up" the code when it comes back. This will vary
from interface changes, various subsystems, etc... Ideally these should
already be determined in the initial requirements documentation, and those
portions given to the American staff. The idea here is to reduce the
American staff to focusing on the more "consumer facing"
aspects of the software, leaving the "meat" to the outsourcing partner.

Which brings me to my final point. This approach, when implemented
correctly, will result in a cost savings of around 50%. The idea that you
can get a "direct savings" of 60-80% by using foreign software developers
who work for only 20% (more Ireland/Israel) and 40% (more
India) of what Americans software developers is a joke. They often have no
concept of business and American locale. And in many cases, they are
"hackers" who need a _lot_ of direction, because they do _not_ get the
training in the software development cycle, quality assurance, etc...

Such things _will_ come in time in their regions, just as their standard of
living comes up, and American companies move yet again to "cheaper"
markets. Sigh, the cycle continues.

Lastly, customer support for American consumers and businesses should
_never_ be outsourced. Companies are learning this the "hard way." The
best way to lose a customer is to have them hear a foreign voice for support
-- be it in America or _any_ other country. This is where Linux and other
Freedomware shines, because it is developed globally, but refined and
supported locally (Red Hat ~ US, Mandrake ~ France, SuSE ~ Germany, etc...)

-- Bryan

P.S. PTC is one of the major vendors putting Linux on the engineering
desktop. It sells one of the leading CAM packages used in the mechanical
and aerospace engineering fields. Main reason? It does 3D for simulation,
modeling, packaging and component layout far better than that "popular civil
engineering" application with add-ons that's really only designed for 2D
(did we have that discussion on this list or another? ;-). Again, don't
assume they are the only ones doing it.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith                                  b.j.smith@ieee.org 
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Communities don't have rights. Only individuals in the community  have
rights. ... That idea of community rights is firmly rooted  in the
'Communist Manifesto.'" -- Michael Badnarik

----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:11:47 EDT