I think separate Prep7/Post1licenses are available.
Rick Fischer
Principal Engineer
Marconi Communications

                                                                                                                              
                    "Todd
                    Meidinger" To: ANSYS User Discussion List <xansys_at_xansys.org>
                    <Todd_Meidinger cc:
                    @irco.com> Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
                    Sent by:
                    xansys-bounces@
                    xansys.org
                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                              
                    12/19/03 01:26
                    PM
                    Please respond
                    to ANSYS User
                    Discussion List
                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                              

Another thing that would be very nice to see would be a licensing model
like Cosmos has. This sort of goes back to the "token" system mentioned
earlier but an expansion of this. It would be nice if the modules of ANSYS
were in effect licensed separately as well. For example PREP/SOLU/POST. If
you were using the SOLU module on one machine you could still use a license
to get into the PREP/POST module elsewhere. Currently the way it is set up
you tie up the entire license for all three even though you are using only
one.

Does that make any sense? It would be nice to have more PREP7 licenses
available than SOLU for example. Currently if I am running some very large
solutions I am effectively locking myself (and others) out of PREP/POST
until this solution is finished. Sometimes very large nonlinear solutions
can lock me out of ANSYS for two entire days. This has forced us to buy
more "full" licenses than we really need.

Todd A. Meidinger
IR/Bobcat
Design Engineer/Analyst

Phone: (701) 678-6063
Fax: (701) 947-6076
Cell: (701) 899-1048
E:Mail: todd_meidinger_at_bobcat.com

                                         "Dean Brown"

                                         <Dean_Brown_at_micro To:
"ANSYS User Discussion List" <xansys_at_xansys.org>
                                         vision.com> cc:

                                         12/19/2003 12:24 Subject:
RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES
                                         PM import

                                         Sent by:

                                         xansys-bounces_at_xa

                                         nsys.org

                                         Please respond to

                                         ANSYS User

                                         Discussion List

I’m not sure this is related to the token method of pricing. I believe that
MSC has always cost more than Ansys for the same functionality.

Best regards,
Dean Brown
Principal Engineer
Microvision, Inc.
www.microvision.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Singer [mailto:Edmund.Singer_at_udlp.com]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 9:44 AM
To: xansys_at_xansys.org
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import

The previous company that I worked for went away from MSC to ANSYS for
that very reason. It turned out, to get the same functionality (that
was currently used), the token method cost more.

Edmund Singer P.E.
Senior Engineer
Applied Mechanics Group
Fluid and Thermal Sciences
United Defense L.P.
email: edmund.singer_at_udlp.com

>>> hliu_at_husky.ca 12/19/03 11:02AM >>>
To follow up my previous posts. My ASD confirms that we can trade in
the
connection tool for DM and pay the difference in prices. To be fair, my
ASD
has always been working very hard to accommodating similar requests
from us.
But I would like to direct my comment to the ANSYS folks in Pittsburgh.

ANSYS should have a more flexible pricing structure. In MSC, they have
the
"tokens" fee structure and here’s how it works:

You want a product from them, and the product requires, says 5 tokens.
You pay or lease for the 5 tokens and able to use the product
Now, the customer not only able to the product he wants at the first
place,
but also able to use any products which requires 5 tokens or less
provided
that the 5 tokens is not being used at the same time.

The advantage of this fee structure is two-folded. The customers have
the
flexible to use any of their products. And it also serves as promotion
of
the full product line which will eventually increase their product
demands
and sales. Make sense ?

Regards,
Herbert Liu P.Eng.
CAE Team Leader - Dev. Engineering
Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ceko, John (Bolton)" <jceko_at_husky.ca>
To: "’ANSYS User Discussion List’" <xansys_at_xansys.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import

> This is a bit of a sore spot with me. The choice of going with the
XOX
> engine was made for presumably good reasons, but geometry importing
> has
long
> been an issue. While I can say that it has improved significantly,
> it’s by no means perfect, and while I don’t expect perfection, I do
> expect better than it’s current incarnation keeping in mind that we
> have to pay for a Connection tool to get the current level of
> performance. One could argue that without any of the add-on tools,
> the geometry importing is woefully inadequate. As Adam points out,
> none of these choices were made by us, and we shouldn’t be forced to

> pay yet again for something that should have worked in the first
> place.
>
> I think it would be fair if we could trade in the Connection tool
for
> DM, since it can export anf files. I’ve already complained to my ASD

> about
this,
> so this is just me venting.
>
> I’m better now :)
>
> John Ceko P. Eng.
> HUSKY Injection Molding Systems
> Index Advanced Engineering
> 560 Queen St. S.
> Bolton, Ontario, Canada, L7E 5S5
> Tel. (905) 951-5000 ext. 3347
> Fax (905) 951-5365
> Email: jceko_at_husky.ca
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shinbrot, Adam [mailto:adam.shinbrot_at_zimmer.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 11:20 AM
> To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
> Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
>
>
> >I still don’t see this as a TECS issue. Improvements
> >have been and are being made to solid modeling in ANSYS
> >and reported bugs get fixed. Significant additional >functionality
>
> Eric,
>
> I would respectfully disagree. I would argue that ANSYS has offered
geometry
> import capability. The fact is, though, that it *does not work*,
much
> of
the
> time. You could call an improvement in this capability "significant
> additional functionality", or you could call it "fixing what was
> broken". The fact that ANSYS has found it necessary to invent a whole

> new paradigm
> (DM) to make the import of CAD gemetry successful *is not my fault*!
The
> fact is, we have been paying extra already for this functionality,
via the
> parasolid interface. The day ANSYS offers us a refund for this
flawed
> interface is the day I will be happy asking management to shell out
> additional money for DM.
>
>
>
> ********************************
> Adam Shinbrot
> Zimmer Spine
> Tel.: 952.830.6324 Fax: 952.837.6924
> adam.shinbrot_at_zimmer.com
> ********************************
> "I’ve been Zimmered!"
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Miller [mailto:eric.miller_at_padtinc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:41 AM
> To: ’ANSYS User Discussion List’
> Subject: RE: [Xansys] [OTHER] ANSYS Design Modeller and IGES import
>
>
> Herbert,
>
> I still don’t see this as a TECS issue. Improvements
> have been and are being made to solid modeling in ANSYS
> and reported bugs get fixed. Significant additional functionality
> just doesn’t fall into maintenance, especially when a royalty is
> involved.
>
> There is no reason to count of faith to make sure ANSYS doesn’t just
> repackage stuff. There are 80,000 users world wide watching their
> every move. The stink raised over DM, which is not repackaging or an

> attempt to pull a sales trick, is an example of how strongly the user

> community watches these things. In addition, those of us who are on

> the advisory committee are pretty blunt.
>
> Anyhow, my $0.02 (what is that in euros these days?
>
> Eric
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> Eric Miller
> Director: Support,
> Training & Development
> Phoenix Analysis &
> Design Technologies
> (480) 813-4884, x103
> www.padtinc.com
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to
which it is addressed and may contain sensitive and/or privileged
material.
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of
any
action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other
than
the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received this in
error,
please contact the sender and destroy any copies of this document.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------