Hello
I'm probably going to repeat myself but the story of the multi-core is not necessarily the heart of the problem if I dare say so.
If you want to use multi-cores, it means that you have to be able to do parallel computing and that's not trivial at all. Because the gain must be greater than one second for it to be significant. And to do a massively parallel if you want to break up the calculation of each feature and put everything together to produce the final result is Kafkaesque.
The problem is that more than 80% ̈of the code is very old: even if they probably had to recompil to decompress the code.
Parallel computing is very complex and becomes unmanageable on ASMs that are a bit copious.
It is interesting to see that in the 2019 version there is a very clear improvement in display performance because they have optimized or rewritten parts of the code to take full advantage of the graphics card (also underused in design).
It is likely that it will rewrite parts of the code because there are many small bits of multi-cores since at least 2010 (especially at startup).
The real question is this! What is SW's concern ? Well, it's simple, just look at the overall offer.
First of all : large accounts or ETIs that can afford the different modules (which are very expensive). Small SMEs, small BEs, etc... even if they surely represent a significant part of their turnover is not their core target, since the basic offer (without simulation, optimization, etc... fits very well and at best people take PDM in addition.
But look at how collaborative is done in your own company, especially if you have PDM, it will inform you where the real sources of productivity are, sorry, we must say now what makes you agile (hihihihihi).
Second : B-to-B collaboration in every sense (and sometimes even if it doesn't make sense). Productivity would be achieved in a simplified exchange between partners and customer-suppliers, but we quickly come up against the heterogeneity of software and means of communication. How many times do you use a secure intranet with your customers and suppliers?
Thirdly SW is preparing for the disappearance of paper, the first victims of which are paper MEPs. In aeronautics (and in the automotive industry, which I don't know as well), they already use a lot of tablets or large touch screens instead of 2D plans, and 3D, from my point of view, simplifies a lot and considerably reduces the number of questions between partners.
We can see it on this forum where a simple 3D drawing submitted to us, is understood by everyone with great relevance. This would be less the case on 2D with layers or overall MEPs.
They want to get closer to the exchange philosophy of CATIA or other large software of this type.
Remember the hopes we had with the SW software which had fantasized about a completely rewritten and super optimized code (whose name I forgot and which we don't hear about anymore) and which in the end is really only used for pre-design, but especially not to do our daily work.
Good! I'm not far from retirement, so it's likely that the only PRO I'll know of will be the one of our entire community and all the great people we don't meet there.
Kind regards