CFX's death warrant is signed

April 28, 2006, 06:53

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix....8362&highlight=

April 28, 2006, 09:21

Looks like the fluent solver and poor meshing via Gambit days are numbered!!

April 28, 2006, 09:43

Oh you CFX users so blindly optimistic, of course ansys are going to pay $600 odd million then decide to continue developing the code they paid $20 million for. I agree on the gambit front but the CFX solver terrible in transient and uses 4 times the memory of any other solver

April 28, 2006, 11:59

No,

I still rate Fluent as Number One, though for compressible flow it needs improvement.

Agree, ICEM-HEXA is far better than Gambit, but Gambit is still the best hybrid mesher I have used.

A.S.

April 28, 2006, 13:49

You have to look into the recent history of the MathWorks' "buying" of Matrixx to see what's going to happen next.

Big player A buys competitor B and then kills it dead. Government smells a rat and pursues Big player A. Lawyers get richer. Users still only have the choice of A or nothing.

April 28, 2006, 13:53

I think the comparison is incomparable, the idea of ansys spending that much money on the largest most widely used code on the planet and killing it off is laughable. It would be like apple buying microsoft then killing windows!

April 28, 2006, 14:10

Unfortunately its the corporate world which decided what to let live even in the world of physics.

April 28, 2006, 21:22

In the meantime, opensource code is becoming usable & useful... The corporate games, mergers & buy-ups occur towards the end of poduct lifecycles... Fluent, CFX etc are old technology...

April 30, 2006, 03:19

I am completely agree with you, Ben.

May 2, 2006, 13:27

Interesting comparison, however it could be argued that Apple was by far the better code and that Microsoft just had better sales people.

Now you get microsoft, with the poorer operating system buying all the other software companies, amalgamating them into their code because they were unable to write something half decent themselves !!!

May 8, 2006, 13:58

Fluent is a powerful code and has pros and cons, CFX as well. I have used Fluent for over 6 years. I have access to CFX, but the group I work in deemed Fluent much more superior for the applications we use, so I don't have much experience with CFX. The only thing is will ANSYS use the CFX or FLUENT GUI for there new product or something totally new? That's up to them, but I can only be hopeful that lessons are learned and software is improved to have the most robust CFD software package ever. That means Fluent users and CFX users have to communicate with each other and their field reps to help make whatever this new CFD software will be a better product.

May 9, 2006, 03:23

Exactly what I would hope to see. When CFX was fist purchsed, the Patran front end was the first thing to go - especially given the conflicts that presented with ICEM. It would be good to see all the great points of each code to be taken and brought together, and all the bad areas re-written or redeveloped ! Or am I dreaming ?

April 28, 2006, 06:53	CFX's death warrant is signed	#1
Ben Guest Posts: n/a	http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix....8362&highlight=

April 28, 2006, 09:21	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#2
Bill Guest Posts: n/a	Looks like the fluent solver and poor meshing via Gambit days are numbered!!

April 28, 2006, 09:43	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#3
Ben Guest Posts: n/a	Oh you CFX users so blindly optimistic, of course ansys are going to pay $600 odd million then decide to continue developing the code they paid $20 million for. I agree on the gambit front but the CFX solver terrible in transient and uses 4 times the memory of any other solver

April 28, 2006, 11:59	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#4
A.S. Guest Posts: n/a	No, I still rate Fluent as Number One, though for compressible flow it needs improvement. Agree, ICEM-HEXA is far better than Gambit, but Gambit is still the best hybrid mesher I have used. A.S.

April 28, 2006, 13:49	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#5
Steve Guest Posts: n/a	You have to look into the recent history of the MathWorks' "buying" of Matrixx to see what's going to happen next. Big player A buys competitor B and then kills it dead. Government smells a rat and pursues Big player A. Lawyers get richer. Users still only have the choice of A or nothing.

April 28, 2006, 13:53	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#6
Ben Guest Posts: n/a	I think the comparison is incomparable, the idea of ansys spending that much money on the largest most widely used code on the planet and killing it off is laughable. It would be like apple buying microsoft then killing windows!

April 28, 2006, 14:10	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#7
Harish Guest Posts: n/a	Unfortunately its the corporate world which decided what to let live even in the world of physics.

April 28, 2006, 21:22	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#8
diaw Guest Posts: n/a	In the meantime, opensource code is becoming usable & useful... The corporate games, mergers & buy-ups occur towards the end of poduct lifecycles... Fluent, CFX etc are old technology...

April 30, 2006, 03:19	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#9
CFD Student Guest Posts: n/a	I am completely agree with you, Ben.

May 2, 2006, 13:27	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#10
Stuart Guest Posts: n/a	Interesting comparison, however it could be argued that Apple was by far the better code and that Microsoft just had better sales people. Now you get microsoft, with the poorer operating system buying all the other software companies, amalgamating them into their code because they were unable to write something half decent themselves !!!

May 8, 2006, 13:58	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#11
Stephen Guest Posts: n/a	Fluent is a powerful code and has pros and cons, CFX as well. I have used Fluent for over 6 years. I have access to CFX, but the group I work in deemed Fluent much more superior for the applications we use, so I don't have much experience with CFX. The only thing is will ANSYS use the CFX or FLUENT GUI for there new product or something totally new? That's up to them, but I can only be hopeful that lessons are learned and software is improved to have the most robust CFD software package ever. That means Fluent users and CFX users have to communicate with each other and their field reps to help make whatever this new CFD software will be a better product.

May 9, 2006, 03:23	Re: CFX's death warrant is signed	#12
Stuart Guest Posts: n/a	Exactly what I would hope to see. When CFX was fist purchsed, the Patran front end was the first thing to go - especially given the conflicts that presented with ICEM. It would be good to see all the great points of each code to be taken and brought together, and all the bad areas re-written or redeveloped ! Or am I dreaming ?