This article reads like a combination of sour grapes with the odd clever observation.
Yes, Catia was a PITA to use and support, but it was productive in the right hands. PTC Pro/E was also a PITA to use, but very productive for experts. His outright dismissal of Solidworks is hard to reconcile with my personal experience using it to design components over the last 20+ years. These workflows might be different from his preference, but that doesn't make them invalid.
The referenced article about the failed promise of parametric modelling does have a good point though, although I don't think it's fully expressed: modification of an existing design in parametric CAD feels like it's a lot more difficult (and likely to blow up) than a software project of similar complexity. Perhaps this is inherent complexity? I'm not sure, but I do find that it's easy to get caught in a trap of endless circular revisions on related parts for what feels like a simple design change sometimes.
Yes, Catia was a PITA to use and support, but it was productive in the right hands. PTC Pro/E was also a PITA to use, but very productive for experts. His outright dismissal of Solidworks is hard to reconcile with my personal experience using it to design components over the last 20+ years. These workflows might be different from his preference, but that doesn't make them invalid.
The referenced article about the failed promise of parametric modelling does have a good point though, although I don't think it's fully expressed: modification of an existing design in parametric CAD feels like it's a lot more difficult (and likely to blow up) than a software project of similar complexity. Perhaps this is inherent complexity? I'm not sure, but I do find that it's easy to get caught in a trap of endless circular revisions on related parts for what feels like a simple design change sometimes.