Overall, the iPad disappoints a guy like me!

For every cool thing the iPad does well, there are three things that it doesn’t do well. I will spare you the typical Apple fan boy praise. It’s slick and the overall user experience is slick. Especially, if you are used to the iPhone. In general, the very top-level stuff that it does – touch screen, prettiness of a UI, innovative App store- it does really well.

Once you get an hour or two after opening the box, you realize.

 

ipad_touch_mock_up

There is a laundry list of things it simply sucks at….

  1. No caps lock – what???
  2. The shift key stinks and doesn’t capitalize properly.
  3. Keyboard is overall made for skinny fingers. Really skinny
  4. Multi-tasking is non-existent. Try streaming music and switching over to another program.
  5. Web browsing is painful – try copy/paste from one safari session to the next. Safari in itself, zero good things to say. Put Firefox, or even chrome on there, now we are talking.
  6. I thought I would get used to the keyboard, but its not happening. The touch screen of the iphone is one thing and tolerable because its a phone and the space is small. For the larger iPad version its simply lame.
  7. If its an extension to my computer/phone, why can’t I charge from my laptop.
  8. Using this in a “work environment” is close to pointless for mainstream users. I realize, that I am referring to “mainstream windows” users, but this is 97% of the world? Where is easy VPN? Easy migration to MS Office? I’d settle for Google docs, still nothing? How about for dev folks- Visual Studio? I am far from a Windows zealot, but….
  9. Facebook app is an iphone app? What!? I know this is not apple’s fault, but when you are trying to be top-dog, it’s your fault.
  10. App for LinkedIn doesn’t include “group’ activities? Close to pointless without.
  11. iPad wifi strength blatantly stinks and has required an additional $25/mo 3G plan. Works in 60% of my house, not the other- kid’s playroom on the 2nd floor, for example. But works, above and below that?
  12. The one case I found, is mediocre at best. Why would I not read on a kindle? Because, I would hope to use it in bed and it’s too big, too heavy, too clunky for that. Thank you kindle!

The list goes on an on an on. What does it do well?

  1. Overall, usability to what it does support is slick, flick of the finger and you are up and running.
  2. The twitteriffic app is awesome.
  3. With a good signal, netflix is amazing!
  4. The evernote app is #1- EXCEPT I haven;t found any connection to email or web browsing via a clipper of sorts. So, other than searching, what’s the point?

Conclusion

I’m one of those in-betweeners. I love apple products for their design, beauty etc. But I am also a free-spirit open source guy that hates everything that apple stands for. In other words, I try to be open-minded. I love beautiful products that work awesomely. Those that exceed my expectations. Those that are just, WOW!. On the surface, the iPad is that device. Once you get into it, the iPad simply disappoints a guy like me. So….. I gave it to my wife, for the web browsing, netflix, kids gaming stuff that she uses it for, I’m a hero.

For the portability of an on-the-go supplement to my workday, the iPad is far from it.

 dell-mini-10

I have bit the bullet and am awaiting a Dell mini10 with windows 7 starter installed. I know… yuck, right? I’m stoked. I need a portable machine for writing specs, email, web browsing, cruising web content on the fly in the evenings, when I’m travelling, sitting in coffee shops to get a breather.

With all of the negative comments above, there is a massive need for a portable device for engineers that are road warriors, field folks and those of us that thrive on portability. Ideally, I want a (ubuntu-powered) tablet that provides an extension to my day to day, I want a device that I can throw in my backpack, sit on my lap in the yard, click and pick on a train and prop up at a coffee shop. I don’t expect fully engineering 3D capability, but I want access to my models, I want to access my 3D data, monitor my CFD simulations via a browser, access email that replicates me sitting at my computer. I want the ability to access all of my files (dropbox), web browse (sync) as if was at my laptop or desktop or phone.

Let’s face it, all of the above is universal enough, that its not a matter of if, its a matter of when.

upfront CFD is bridging the gap between the design and analysis communities

The word “upfront” seems to be the buzz word of many CAE companies. It is a word that can have a variety of interpretations. Many refer to it as “conceptual”, “over simplified”, “very early stages”. Upfront can have a much broader meaning than conceptual. It can certainly encompass the conceptual phase. But, there are numerous companies that do not have the luxury of doing napkin-sketch concepts. For these folks, the word upfront equates to the “design phase” or even the “re-design phase”. In other words, any phase prior to production- the earlier, the better.

proverb

If we look at upfront CFD, it was born with the vision to empower mechanical design teams with flow and thermal simulation tools. It is a methodology to help make the design process more efficient and unleash the power of design exploration. The concept of upfront CFD is to perform a ‘design study’, which is a design exploration of various what-if scenarios in order to explore design alternatives and compare these ideas side by side directly on your desktop. If the design is conceptual, great. If the design, is a re-design, that’s fine. If the design is a retro-fit, that’s ok too. How is this different than traditional CFD?

In the early days, those that were doing CFD, tended to be the large scale aerospace and automotive companies. In simple terms, it was for those that were pushing the forefront of large scale innovative design and needed a better way. They had very costly flow and thermal design challenges that needed to be solved and were close to impossible (size & cost) to solve in a physical prototyping environment. So, for them, their design process needed to be improved. But their process was vastly different from those in the SMB market. The big guys were dealing in a different $$$ bracket and could afford to be early adopters. Unfortunately, the CFD technology, computing power, adoption of 3D and life in computer-aided engineering was in its infancy. The breakthroughs were rapid, but it isolated the community of users that would even consider CFD.

The end result was a fracture between those that design and those that analyze. There are exceptional companies out there, that were able to develop a process where designers and analysts collaborate efficiently. But, in general, these are vastly different worlds. The experience and education is often different as well as the tools and methodologies.

2011 game 3 image thermal iso

Companies began to step out of this mold and multi-tasking design engineering became more common. Engineers/designers wore hats of all sorts. They were driving CAD, doing the testing, spec-ing materials etc. This community of engineers were the early adopters of upfront CFD. They felt “the pain” of not having the support of an analysis group, they realized physical prototyping was killing the bottom line and they were leaving innovated ideas on the white boards of abandoned brainstorming sessions. The multi-tasking engineering folks had a brand new way of thinking about CFD. Upfront CFD wasn’t simply making traditional CFD easier, it was changing the way engineers viewed and interacted with CFD. It was focused on helping improve the process of design. Allowing engineers to leverage their CAD models and receive design decision making information in minutes and hours rather than days/weeks or not at all.

In the early days, it made sense that multi-tasking engineers gravitated to upfront CFD. But, the reality is that all engineering organizations are different. Some subscribe to the philosophy of multi-tasking, others believe that individual groups is the way to go. The problem is not whether there are separate groups, the issue is about the process in which these groups approach design.

There has to be synergy in the entire process. Design procedures need to be established so that all members of the team can work as efficiently as possible. CAD models need to be modeled in a way that makes simulation a natural part of the process. Whether a CAD designer actually clicks the “solve” button or whether the provide the necessary design “variations” to the analyst. They have to be involved in the process and the education. Everyone needs to be onboard and approach the design process as a team.

Choke Valve 4 side by side with vector

Upfront CFD is about helping defining process within a single group, across multiple groups or within an entire organization. Eliminating redundant steps, such as the application of common boundary conditions and material properties is fundamental. Leveraging the rich information from the CAD model should be a rhetorical step. Getting you to the point that you can focus on design decision making should be the goal, not all of the steps to get you there.

CFdesign 2011 has tools in place to allow engineering organizations, to develop standards and best practices and can be deployed across the entire organization and allows sharing of these tools via the web. Sharing of process automation tools such as customized material libraries, design study templates, design study rules and even 3D interactive results can be securely accessed from the CFdesign Customer Portal. Upfront CFD is much more than simple conceptual models. Upfront CFD is an overall design philosophy than allows engineers to get more done in 24 hours than any other method.

1-Click Simulation in CFdesign 2011

One of my favorite new features in CFdesign 2011, is the ability to setup a CFD simulation in a single click. Yeah, that’s right, a single click. No smoke and mirrors. We built automation tools into 2011 that allow engineers to leverage the rich information that exists in their CAD models, to help drive their CFD design studies.

We are talking about the info that we, as engineers, deal with everyday –part names, material names. We have leveraged this information in the past, but we are making the concept of Rules that much easier and accessible. We are taking “set it, forget” it to the next level. You want to create a rule, simply right click. We built a Rule Manager that makes controlling the what rules get applied where, simple.

If you define your CAD materials in your CAD system, the materials inside your CFD system should automatically be applied, right? Suppose you do not apply material properties in CAD? Or you want to give a name to a component, like an inlet or an outlet. We implemented CAD-entity Groups. Simple tool on the CFdesign toolbar in your CAD system that allows you to name simulation specific information and allow Rules to take over in CFdesign.

 

One of the goals we were after in 2011 was to make upfront CFD a natural part of your design process. Reducing any barriers that you might see in order to allow you to perform design studies every project, every time.