|
August 25, 1999 Dear Brant: (Brant Brumbeloe, Publisher, FPC Magazine) I read the article you published regarding the reaction to the review of AutoSPRINK software in your August issue. The author, Gaylon Claiborne, seemed rather ambiguous on may issues and seemed to be basing his evaluation on hearsay and secondhand information rather than his own experience with the software. He indicates that it may be worth high marks if it was in fact developed by input from sprinkler designers and may be an “advantage” to the larger sprinkler companies or design offices as it is too expensive. First of all, the base price of AutoSPRINK is under $7,000, which includes design and integrated hydraulics. What Mr. Claiborne may not know is AutoSPRINK is a standalone design package that runs on Windows. As such associated costs of other programs on the market can be well above the single purchase price of AutoSPRINK. Let’s do the math. AutoCAD Program $3,000+, comparable sprinkler would be $7,000. Using the higher priced programs on the market, you could potentially invest upwards of $11,000. Now, if you add the learning curve costs to first become proficient at CAD and then learn to use the third party sprinkler program, proficiency could take 6 to 12 months. Now you’re talking salary cost vs. production. AutoSPRINK’s learning curve, on the other hand, is approximately two weeks to one month to obtain results. Total required software costs above show that the program is equal to or even less than most other programs on the market. However, when you consider the learning curve versus productivity there is no comparison. AutoSPRINK’s user friendly interface and intuitiveness allows for almost immediate production versus tens of thousands of dollars spent learning other programs. I would like to disagree for a moment and explain that I have been a sprinkler designer for the past 20 years and have been presented and have tried and tested several sprinkler CAD programs along with other colleges. Of programs proved to be complete and user friendly or affordable. With the above in mind, I decided to wait for someone to meet the challenge developing a standalone program, which required very little training, while incorporating all peripherals necessary to present a complete and accurate sprinkler design package. In early 1997, I heard of a new system called AutoSPRINK. As usual, I was very skeptical from past experiences. I was also distressed about not having any experience in CAD design. After seeing the program in operation at a client’s office. I purchased the program. Two months after the purchase, AutoSPRINK sat idly on my hard drive as I was trying to justify switching to CAD. Shortly thereafter, I w3as offered the opportunity to design a 700,000 sq ft. ESPR sprinkler system. I knew I could not complete this project within the scheduled two-month design deadline without the use of a CAD design program. I decided to take the plunge into CAD. At this time, I also determined it would be beneficial to take the AutoSPRINK training course provided by the company. Remember, I was glowing green from CAD design experience when I entered the class. During the class I could hardly contain myself from shouting praises to the person who wrote the program. By the end of the three-day class I felt confident enough to tackle the large project. I not only designed the 700,000 sq. ft. ESFR system on time, I completed the fire pump and pick rack module system also. Granted 3D design initially was a bit more labor intensive, however, it is now second nature to my design process and 2D seems obsolete in comparison. Throughout my first few designs, AutoSPRINK’s technical staff were easily accessible, knowledgeable, friendly and continue to be so. Getting back to the cost comparison. I can personally say I have increased my design output by at least 50% already and even more depending on the type of job involved. There are many factors involved in considering the true cost of design software, by comparison, I know of software that is offered free if you use a certain product. If the software doesn’t perform, even that price is too expensive in wasted time and effort. I would like to add that I am talking about AutoSPRINK from experience and as a user. I can now honestly say there is finally a sprinkler design program that is complete, concise and so user friendly that it can be used by both the experienced and novice designers. I would also like to suggest that the content of your future articles regarding reviews or costs of AutoSPRINK or any other design software be of a more thoroughly researched content before publishing them to help others who are trying to do the same. Very truly yours, Dana Thompson
|