Comments for Daily PLM Think Tank Blog http://plmtwine.com Product Lifecycle Management by Oleg Shilovitsky Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:42:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ Comment on Who Can Generate 3D/PLM Content For Apple iPad? by Jailbreak Rumors http://plmtwine.com/2010/01/28/who-can-generate-3dplm-content-for-ipad/#comment-18495 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:42:36 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/?p=4071#comment-18495 Jailbreak Rumors…

[...]Who Can Generate 3D/PLM Content For Apple iPad? « Daily PLM Think Tank Blog[...]…

]]> Comment on The anatomy of MultiCAD-PDM Integrations by Stephen Porter http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18487 Tue, 21 Feb 2012 21:08:13 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18487 Oleg,

Both of these articles definitely fall into our purview. The premise we have operated under is that the native PDM tool will always offer superior functionality when it comes to managing CAD data versus a third party integration. Trying to write and keep up with numerous CAD integrations and keeping them compatible is a daunting task. It would seem that having some sort of integration framework between the PDM and PLM would be the cleanest approach. That being said CAD vendors can make it just as challenging to integrate with their PDM tools as it is to manage their CAD data and their are advantages to only having to maintain one system. As long as CAD vendors attempt to use their ownership of their CAD data as a competitive weapon this issue will not go away. Customers need to hold their vendors accountable for holding them hostage through their CAD files.

]]> Comment on Part numbers and External Classification Schemas by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/08/part-numbers-and-external-classification-schemas/#comment-18455 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:13:32 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/08/part-numbers-and-external-classification-schemas/#comment-18455 Peter, thanks for commenting! I’m interesting to learn more about standards in part numbering. Are you talking about industry-standards or company standards? I think, every company has some classification issues and this is what Part Numbering schema is trying to resolve. Best, Oleg

]]> Comment on SolidWorks World 2012: Community and the opportunity for PLM by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/14/solidworks-world-2012-community-and-the-opportunity-for-plm/#comment-18454 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:11:18 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/14/solidworks-world-2012-community-and-the-opportunity-for-plm/#comment-18454 Dave, I can see a very interesting interplay between current SW status and newcoming V6. GPBassi clearly has some interesting challenges to solve in coming year. So, we can stay tuned :) . Thanks, for commenting. Best, Oleg

]]> Comment on Multi-CAD and PDM: Dead Lock? by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18453 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:09:32 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18453 Thanks, Brian for the clarification. I think our spontaneous tweet-catch-up about DraftSight-Vault will lead to more productive conversation about Multi-CAD and PDM. The first post just went out – The Anatomy of MultiCAD-PDM integrations (http://beyondplm.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/). Few more will be coming later. Best, Oleg

]]> Comment on Multi-CAD and PDM: Dead Lock? by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18452 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:06:44 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18452 Jonathan, Thanks for the comment! We’ve been discussed multi-PDM integrations. However, I can see two trends that will happen in parallel. CAD systems will adopt “stable-PDM-bundle” (normally of the same vendors). At the same time, new PDM entrants will try to establish new ways to integrate that will try to solve the problem of CAD/PDM integration complexity. It will be interesting to watch. Just my opinion… Oleg

]]> Comment on Multi-CAD and PDM: Dead Lock? by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18451 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:03:10 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/17/multi-cad-and-pdm-dead-lock/#comment-18451 Damir, I agree, the complexity of cross-vendor/product development made multi-CAD and PDM complex. Open APIs supported across multiple vendors can solve the problem, in my view. Thanks for your comment! best, Oleg

]]> Comment on The anatomy of MultiCAD-PDM Integrations by olegshilovitsky http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18450 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:00:37 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18450 Hello Mr. Not Important,
Yes, I’m aware about XPLM. As far as I know, XPLM is a partner of many PDM/PLM companies. However, I’m not sure understood what you said about Spaceclaim. Did you mean that fact Spaceclaim has no dedicated PDM, for the moment?
Thanks for your comments, Oleg

]]> Comment on Future PLM platforms and SAP / Oracle technological wars by best tweezers http://plmtwine.com/2012/01/26/future-plm-platforms-and-sap-oracle-technological-wars/#comment-18449 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:49:56 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/01/26/future-plm-platforms-and-sap-oracle-technological-wars/#comment-18449 best tweezers…

[...]Future PLM platforms and SAP / Oracle technological wars « Daily PLM Think Tank Blog[...]…

]]> Comment on The anatomy of MultiCAD-PDM Integrations by Not Important http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18448 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 01:42:11 +0000 http://plmtwine.com/2012/02/19/the-anatomy-of-multicad-pdm-integrations/#comment-18448 Hello Oleg,

I think you are missing another very interesting option/solution

a MULTICAD CAD connected to MANY PDMs

this could be only offered today by SPACECLAIM:-)

and interestingly they do have a german partner that has multi PDM/ERP Integration platform that is really unique

Look at XPLM.

What do you think ?

PS: I promise, I do not work for any of those companies :-)

]]>