> "All problems start with a solution process, that leads to a better process, that leads to a better process and on and on, with each advancement providing a more productive solution. Unless something gets in the way that stops the advancement of this process by putting in a much less productive process based on politics or vested interest. This is a story of how politics and vested interest made a decision that caused Boeing to make a Billion-dollar 3D CAD mistake."
A drop of process in your process? Or perhaps you prefer process. This is unreadable, couldn't make it past the intro :/ (there's also "solution" and "politics").
Corporate cronyism made a really bad piece of software and fucked Boeing's business (translation - your plane tickets in part funded some grossly overpaid people at Dassault)
TL;DR
Boeing had two systems, one was 7g, other was 70g. Feature parity the cheaper solution did more.
Some IT group hated the cheaper solution because they had trouble administering it, so they opted for a multi mill price tag instead of a mil price tag.
Sounds like on top of that, there was a bunch of artificial process which had to do with old artifacts of cad design, which only remained because the IT group built processes around managing those artifacts, not because they made sense in any fashion. The expensive software compounded the issue instead of solving it because of kickbacks and improper interests at Dassault.
Meanwhile the cheap solution was used by pretty much every third party supplying Boeing with parts, to great success. It almost sounds like the internal software at Boeing was used more as a review system and didn't actuall provide any use, they just outsourced the real solutioning to their providers who were not held hostage by an incompetent and corrupt IT dept.
At some point Dassault acquires Solidworks, their software is overengineered and sucks.
Over time things gradually get better - the expensive solution never gains new features, just new headaches.
TBH I'm not sure where the billions lost come from - I presume he is saying doing everything in house would have beem cheaper? But Boeing was just busy hemmoraghing money paying for upgrades to a system that hadn't been doing its job for decades?
A drop of process in your process? Or perhaps you prefer process. This is unreadable, couldn't make it past the intro :/ (there's also "solution" and "politics").