How IoT can eclipse and outcompete PLM platforms

September 1, 2015

plm-iot-eclipse

IoT is one of the biggest buzzword these days. IoT technologies and tools are promising to connect physical products and delivery new type of software services leveraging product data and analytic. In the past few months, I’ve got many questions about IoT and its impact on PLM. It made me think about different aspects of how IoT and PLM trajectories can intertwined. No doubt, IoT will impact engineering and manufacturing industry. And the result can be surprising, in my view.

Competition might have different faces. Long time ago when visited a company manufacturing luxury yachts, I asked them who is their direct competitor. The answer was “Ferrari cars”. There is a simple reason for that. A person who will buy Ferrari has lower chance to buy a yacht at the same year. Earlier last week, my attention was caught by an interesting article – Dropbox: the first dead decacorn. It gives you another angle on competition between companies. Here is my favorite passage:

If you’re worth a billion dollars, you’re probably doing enough things well that your direct competitors can’t take you to the cleaners overnight. Instead, your nightmares shift to a fate even scarier than being outcompeted: being eclipsed. Specifically, being eclipsed by someone at one level of the stack above or below you.

What does this look like in practice? It’s what Microsoft did to the PC manufacturers, and then what the web browser did to Microsoft. It’s what Android/iOS did to the handset makers, and what Facebook is trying to do to them in turn. To those being eclipsed, it’s terrifying because the change happens so gradually and then so suddenly: Compaq was one of the best PC makers around until all of a sudden Windows was what mattered, not the machine it ran on. Then a bit later on, Windows ruled the world and Microsoft was King- but all the interesting stuff started happening inside the web browser. My point being: Compaq didn’t get creamed because somebody else came along and made a better desktop PC. They lost because all of a sudden Windows was what was important- and other PC Manufacturers like Dell were better suited to thrive in the new reality of modular commodity.

Both examples can helps to think about competition in a different form of its existence. In PLM world, if company decided to implement ERP, it usually lower chances to make a decision about PLM the same year. Historically PLM vs ERP competition postponed PLM implementations because companies had no time, focus and budget to deal with PLM implementation when they made investment and focus on ERP side. In many situations, PLM vs ERP competition was a competition for vision. If a company has PLM vision and put a focus on product innovation and product development processes, the priority will be to define PLM strategy. In that case PLM vision outcompetes ERP manufacturing strategy.

Few days ago, Autodesk announced the acquisition of SeeControl – Califronia based software outfit developing enterprise IoT Cloud Service helps manufacturers and systems integrators create virtual product experiences and new service revenue. It organizes and makes sense of data from the Internet of Things with no coding skills required. The press release is here. The following quote by Amar Hanspal, Autodesk SVP for Information modeling and platform products is confirming the fact Autodesk joined “IoT vision club”.

“A new future of making things is emerging, where any built object, product or environment can be embedded with sensors that can feed information back into the design process. The acquisition of SeeControl is the first step on Autodesk’s ongoing efforts to develop new technologies and solutions that will help our customers leverage the Internet of Things, starting by enabling them to capture, analyze, and utilize data from their products. We welcome the SeeControl team and ecosystem to Autodesk,”

The following short video can give you a good perspective of what SeeControl can do.

Among many things, I captured few interesting characteristics of SeeControl solutions that sounds very complementary to PLM infrastructure – product data models, workflow services, on the fly reporting and dashboards. Combined with the architecture that has cloud scale, it is an interesting combination of elements that can raise many questions about how does it can be aligned with a typical PLM implementation.

From some conversations online, I’ve got a sense that SeeControl will become part of the same group as PLM 360. Which can make a perfect sense if Autodesk is planning to create a larger scale cloud platform to cover wider scope of services for manufacturers and building industry. I hope to learn more about it later today at Autodesk PLM360 conference in Boston – the keynote by Scott Reese, Autodesk VP of Cloud platform might give us few data points about future PLM360 and SeeControl trajectories.

What is my conclusion? PLM and IoT trajectories are going to be intertwined and it might take some interesting forms. IoT platforms can out-competed and eclipsed by IoT platforms on the level of stack above or below PLM – the most scary perspective for PLM vendors. Autodesk joined IoT PLM competition race after PTC, which made few strong steps towards arming itself with IoT platforms and tools. Future few years will show an interesting development in the development of both PLM and IoT platforms for manufacturing. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


Will Autodesk PLM360 make a difference for SME?

August 31, 2015

accelearate-2015-plm-360

SME was always a different nut to crack for PLM vendors. My last year article “Why PLM vendors stuck to provide solution for SME” shares some of my ideas why it happened. PLM vendors attacked smaller manufacturing companies with flexible platforms and out-of-the-box solutions. But it was though. Many implementations failed. Even more went completely out of budget. The PLM implementation project usually is the most complicated part.

It seems to me, cloud is the last refuge of PLM vendors to increase an adoption of PLM by SME companies. Autodesk was one of the first large vendors that took cloud technologies as a central part of their strategy. Among variety of cloud products Autodesk developed for the last few years, Autodesk PLM360 is the one that offer new type of PLM solution – SaaS application available via subscription from public cloud.

Over the weekend, my attention caught by Engineering.com article Is PLM an Option for SME’s? by Verdi Ogewell gives an good check mark on what is happening with Autodesk PLM 360. It brings a perspective from analysts (CIMdata and Gartner) as well as testimonial from one of the long time PLM360 customers (Roulunds Braking) originally started to use PLM 360 when it was Datastay (company and product that provided core technology for what is current called PLM 360).

Cloud is clearly solving the problem to ramp up PLM system quickly. Stan Przybylinski of CIMdata explains why is that:

“For the small and medium sized enterprises (SME) targeted by Autodesk with PLM 360, the Cloud is an easy, low cost way to get started on PLM. There are really no services required, which is a stark contrast with the legacy on-premises leaders.”

Integration is remaining a very painful thing in PLM implementations. Which confirms some of my thoughts that future of manufacturing will depend on solving old PLM-ERP integration problems. The following passage can give you some idea how and why it is hard for manufacturing companies to decide about PLM-ERP integrations:

The connections to the ERP-system are often surrounded by manual work involving spreadsheets.How did Roulunds solve this problem? Mark Lawrence tells me that they have been pushing this issue during the last three years. “But these things take time, and it’s still on the table. The whole idea that I’ve raised is to integrate it with SAP via SAP’s own integration software. There are no connections right now, but that’s what we’re looking to do in the future. When we update information in Autodesk it would update SAP automatically, and if we update SAP it would update Autodesk,Then the system will track which information was updated and at what time, whether it goes through an approval process in the meantime or if it is fully automated. These things have to be decided.”

But, it is wrong to think that cloud is a silver bullet that will change PLM world for SME companies overnight. Autodesk is growing PLM 360 use base and revenues. Engineering.com gives a data point for $72M revenues for Autodesk cPDM, but didn’t provide a product breakdown Autodesk is selling in cPDM segment. One of the conclusions that SME customers are still remaining a tricky problem to solve even for Autodesk.

But nothing comes easy in the world of PLM for product realization processes among SMB companies. “Even cloud-based software comes with investments and necessary planning. For example, it is vital to plan for migrating data, organizing content within the application, and structuring the user environment for easy content access and change management,” Gartner’s Halpern concludes.

What is my conclusion? Cloud is an important element to change PLM from heavy weight on-premise projects into agile and lean solutions. PLM360 provides a very interesting solution that done a lot things to create modern browser based user experience and leverage public cloud infrastructure for PLM projects and implementations. Still PLM implementations and integrations are remaining though problem for PLM. Will PLM360 found a magic formula how to crack SME segment? This is a good question to ask. I’m coming to Accelerate 2015Autodesk PLM360 conference in Boston this week and hope to learn more and share it with you. Stay tuned…

Note: you can register to Accelearte 2015 keynote presentation streaming online here.

Best, Oleg


Will Minecraft Experience take off in design and PLM?

July 20, 2015

minecraft-plm-experience

We speak about new technological trends and how to simplify enterprise implementation. At the same time, large CAD and PLM deployments are experiencing integration and user experience challenges. File based paradigm is the one all mainstream CAD systems are supporting. The challenges of enterprise integration and complex user experience are real and customers are experiencing it every day.

The article Collaborative Design Software in Today’s medical development is discussing few trends and gives few examples how to solve these problems. It brings back the idea of gamification, but takes it for real with the example of Minecraft software. Here is the passage from an article:

Gathering online to design buildings and cities, more than 100 million people worldwide are registered users of the low-resolution video game Minecraft. In early 2015, the pocket edition of the game for iOS and Android devices passed the 30 million download mark. Called by some the Legos of the 21st century, Minecraft is more than just a game, it’s a sign of where design is going.

The idea of cloud software that can stitch fragmented data is appealing as something that will take off in the future PLM platforms. This is where execs from both Autodesk and Dassault Systems are agreeing. According to Carl White of Autodesk:

“When we came off the drafting board into CAD, we were looking for ways to get rid of the roadblocks in design,” says Carl White, senior director of manufacturing engineering products at software provider Autodesk. “One of those last roadblocks is fitting different designs together. With the cloud, you’re not dealing with different designs. You have one version of the product, and everyone’s using that.”

Somewhat similar idea of integrated experience is coming from Monica Menghini of Dassault Systemes.

“Our platform of 12 software applications covers 3D modeling (SOLIDWORKS, CATIA, GEOVIA, BIOVIA); simulation (3DVIA, DELMIA, SIMULA); social and collaboration (3DSWYM, 3DXCITE, ENOVIA); and information intelligence (EXALEAD, NETVIBES),” explains Monica Menghini, Dassault executive vice president and chief strategy officer. “These apps together create the experience. No single point solution can do it – it requires a platform capable of connecting the dots. And that platform includes cloud access and social apps, design, engineering, simulation, manufacturing, optimization, support, marketing, sales and distribution, communication (PR and advertising), PLM – all aspects of a business; all aspects of a customer’s experience.”

Both examples are interesting and can provide some space to fantasy about future ideal experience when files are gone and applications are integrated. However, the real life is much complex and can set many roadblocks. Here are top 3 things that design software companies need to solve to open roads towards future PLM minecraft universe.

1- Platform openness. It is hard to believe customers will use a software package from a single vendor. What is the future concept of openness that will be powerful enough to support companies’ business and don’t block customers workflows?

2- Legacy data. Engineering and manufacturing companies are owning a huge amount of existing data. This is live IP and knowledge. How to make them available in new platforms? This is not a trivial problem to solve from many aspects – technical, legal and time.

3- Educational barrier. Technologies are easy, but people are hard. Vendors can bring new technologies and platforms. At the same time, people will be still looking for known and familiar experience. Yes, new generation of people likes web and online. But engineering and manufacturing workforce is different.

What is my conclusion? Minecraft experience is a brilliant marketing idea. However, I’d be thinking first about customer adoption and transition. After all, many great product initiatives were dead on arrival because of customers had hard time to adopt it and use it in a realistic environment with existing data and everyday problems. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


Why cloud CAD is closer to solve some PLM problems than you think

July 18, 2015

cad-enterprise-data-share-plm-problem

One of the topics I’m following closely these days is cloud CAD development trend. To make cloud CAD work from the cloud, vendors must solve some fundamental data management and PDM problems first. The two most visible players in cloud CAD domain today are Autodesk Fusion360 and Onshape. Although Fusion360 was released almost 3 years ago, I can see some similarity in the way fundamental data management problems will be solved by both products. Note, that Fusion360 is using Autodesk A360 platform for data management. You might be interested to catch up with some of my previous writing about these systems – Autodesk and Onshape disagree about cloud technology and focus and How Fusion360 and Onshape are solving fundamental CAD collaboration problem.

To continue, I want to have a conversation about cloud CAD and Product Lifecycle Development. 3D CAD World recently published an article Onshape: Future of CAD – or Future of PLM? The article brings good points about Onshape built with data management in mind. Here is an interesting passage:

Steve Hess, another member of Onshape’s UX/PD team, followed up Gallo by posting: “As you know Onshape was built with data management in mind. The data management features of Onshape are at the core of the product and will become more exposed as Onshape matures. “In time, Onshape will be the system of record for all types of data & meta-data (data about the data) allowing you to run analysis and simulations…without having [to] copy or reproduce the information in another system. The data stored in Onshape will be visible and accessible to your other enterprise systems.”

Autodesk and Onshape are in a different time phases related to enterprise deployments. While Onshape just started with public beta version back in March, Autodesk released cloud based PLM 360 back in 2012. The last blog from Onshape can give you some interesting perspective on what cloud CAD and Onshape can offer to enterprises out of the box. Navigate to the following link – 5 Ways to advance your career with Onshape. Yes, it speaks about career opportunities, but I want to focus your attention on some technological and product capabilities of Onshape. It related to the native ability of Onshape to share 3D data using browser. One of the uses cases – introduce 3D to manufacturing. Here is my favorite passage:

Stop using email, FTP and Dropbox to share files. Let’s face it, every time you send a copy of a file to someone you create issues with file compatibility, data security or version control. Human error adds to the problem when assemblies are sent without part files, old versions are used, or email size limits are exceeded. There is a better way with Onshape. Just upload your existing CAD data into Onshape and hit “Share.” Now everyone can reference the same data, translate on demand when needed, and you can easily revoke a person’s access if you choose. You will reduce daily frustration while increasing your company’s control of its data.

Introduce 3D to the manufacturing team. Too often, there are a few licenses of 3D CAD being used for product design, while the people designing the fixtures and tooling are using older 2D systems – or even pencil and paper. With Onshape, the entire manufacturing team can experience the benefits of 3D design. You will introduce design efficiencies and give others the tools to drive innovation.

One of the functional requirements for PLM is to make data widely available and used across all teams in the company and extended enterprise. Although, it sounds simple, it was a challenging requirement for many PLM products. Two main reasons – product complexity and expensive licensing mechanism. Onshape has some good news here such as sharing data similar to Google Drive and free licensing model (according to my understanding when engineer shares model with somebody, person is getting free license automatically). The licensing issue is probably require some additional validation. I’m not sure what happens when number of shared document with a single person will grow beyond 5 documents limit. Of course, companies in specific industries might have a problem with public cloud both A360 and Onshape are using.

What is my conclusion? Cloud CAD is getting close to solve some fundamental 3D sharing problems. These problems caused traditional PLM to slow down in their ability to spread across company departments. It is web based, simple and (there is a chance) free or has affordable cost. So, both Onshape and Fusion360/A360 can solve problems that addressed today by premium features of traditional PLM systems. In my view, this is an interesting shift that can disrupt current PLM status quo. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Picture credit Wikipedia Data Share article


How Fusion360 and Onshape are solving fundamental CAD collaboration problem

June 24, 2015

3d-puzzle-design-collaboration

For many years, design collaboration and change management was an ultimate requirement for PDM tools. To manage revision history, share data in the team and apply changes made by different team members was a dream for many users. I’ve seen many attempts to solve this problem by PDM developers with questionable results. The challenge for PDM system was to connect two islands of data – CAD files and PDM database. More successful implementations in this space are belonging to CAD/PDM bundles provided by a single vendor in the situation when both CAD file structure and PDM data is controlled by a single tool.

Cloud CAD technologies are breaking the barrier of existing CAD/PDM bundles by introducing embedded PDM functionality as part of CAD tools. You probably remember my earlier post – Cloud CAD will have to solve PDM problem first. Autodesk Fusion360 and Onshape are two cloud CAD products today that are supposed to turn design collaboration dream into reality. Earlier in my blog I explained why I think Autodesk and Onshape disagree about cloud technology and focus. There are differences in data management approaches, offline mode support and application technologies used by both vendors. But, at the same time, it is very interesting to compare how both products are solving similar problems.

Autodesk Fusion360 blog – June product update review by keqingsong speaks about functionality added to Fusion360 to support distributed design and allows collaboration in distributed teams.

fusion360-distributed-design

The following passage can give you a good description of what means distributed design for Fusion360 including usage of reference geometry and specific version inside of the project. What is interesting is how Fusion360 holds top down relationships between different elements of the project.

This release lays the foundation for distributed designs that will allow for future enhancements. In this update, you will able to insert referenced geometry that is part of the same project. Models outside of the project you are working must be moved or copied to your current project before they can be referenced. When a referenced model is inserted into another model, a reference image appears before the name identifying which components are being referenced.

A “component is out-of-date” notification will appear when a referenced part is updated. You will then have a choice to update and receive the change or keep the current version in your model. Simply right click on the referenced component and select “Get latest”. This intended workflow allows for designs that are in production to reference one version of a model while other versions are being created for a future design. If a component is inside a model that is referenced by another model you must update the sub model first, save it, and then go to the top level and update.

At the same time, my attention was caught by Onshape blog – Under the Hood: How Collaboration Works in Onshape by Ilya Baran gives you a deep insight on how Onshape is managing changes by introducing a concept of "microrevisions".

onshape-microversions

The following passage is explaining how microversions technique applies into distributed environment with multiple users.

For a given Part Studio, at each point in time, the definition is stored as an eternal, immutable object that we internally call a microversion. Whenever the user changes the Part Studio definition, (e.g., edits an extrude length, renames a part, or drags a sketch), we do not change an existing microversion, but create a new one to represent this new definition. The new microversion stores a reference to the previous (parent) microversion and the actual definition change. In this way, we store the entire evolution of the Document: this is accessible to the user as the Document history, allowing the user to reliably view and restore any prior state of an Onshape Document.

These definition changes are designed to be very robust: a change stored in a microversion is intended to apply to the parent microversion, but could be applied to a different one. For instance, if the change is “change the depth of Extrude 1 to 4 in,” as long as the original feature exists (identified using an internal id, so it can be renamed), this change can be applied. As a result, changes coming simultaneously from multiple collaborators can simply be applied to the latest microversion without interfering with each other. Traditional CAD systems based on saving an ever-changing memory state into files cannot do this, even if run on a remote server or with a PDM system attached: the data itself has to be collaborative.

What is my conclusion? Fusion360 and Onshape are trying to solve the problem of design collaboration. Both systems are leveraging cloud data management backend (Autodesk A360 and Onshape) to create robust mechanism to manage data, changes and relationships between design components and projects. The advantage of cloud architecture is that all "implementation mechanics" will be hidden from end users, which is absolutely great news. At the same time, it would be interesting to see how robust these approaches for use cases where Fusion360 and Onshape will have to manage CAD data coming from other CAD systems. To avoid "double PDM tax" is a challenge both systems will have to deal with. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net


PLM + ERP = cloud… what?

June 9, 2015

cloud-plm-erp-and-what

Enterprise resource planning is well established domain for many years. ERP in manufacturing made a very long history of transformation from early days of MRP and MRP II and it is usually a suite of integrated applications used to store data from multiple activities – inventory, product planning, manufacturing, service delivery, sales, etc. For many manufacturing companies, ERP is a fundamental element company use to manage business on daily basis.

Product lifecycle management originally came out engineering activities and management of engineering data – CAD files, engineering bill of materials and later on focused on product development processes and product innovation.

The relationships between PLM and ERP aren’t simple. While both PLM and ERP systems are complementary as a vision, in practice both are very competitive when it comes to customer budgets and controlling specific element of customer information – parts, bill of materials, etc. You might remember my very old blog post – The ugly truth about PLM and ERP monkey volleyball. PLM and ERP are clearly separated by a common bill of materials. BoM is a centerpiece of product development and manufacturing data and it sits accurately between PLM and ERP occupying minds of sales and consulting providers and advisers from both domains.

The increased complexity of products combined with even more increased complexity of manufacturing processes and business relationships often put both ERP and PLM on the line for streamlining business processes, simplifying data integration and optimizing product cost. In my view, the future of manufacturing will depends on solving old PLM / ERP integration problems. Old siloed enterprise models used data ownership as one of the fundamental models. To own data and allow access in a silo (such as PLM, ERP or MES) was one of the first priorities. Today and tomorrow the speed of communication will be more important. To make collaboration and communication fast will be a criteria for future models to survive.

Cloud technologies are restructuring existing software domains and changing established business relationships. It happened in many industries. Will cloud become a force to change an established status quo between PLM and ERP businesses?

Diginomica article – Autodesk, NetSuite – chaos theory in action? put some lights on a trajectory of business between NetSuite – a leading cloud ERP vendor and PLM360 new cloud PLM product business established by Autodesk few years ago. The article has a some marketing and promotion flavor speaking about expanding of Autodesk PLM business. Also, author disclosed that Diginomica is a premier NetSuite service provider. However, NetSuite and PLM360 can give you an interesting perspective on new relationships between PLM and ERP in the cloud.

One of the imponderables about working with any cloud delivered service is just what it might add to an established business that could not have been predicted or foreseen. The combination of an established business, with well-defined product families, can still find itself having new business opportunities thrust upon it in a quite chaotic manner by its association with a cloud services provider.

There is, of course, an obvious complementary fit between a CAD toolset and an ERP system – one manages the design of something and the other manages its appearance as a reality. So Autodesk had spent some time talking to other ERP vendors about potential partnerships. But the company had realized that none of them were the right fit.

The company realized that what they were looking for was a cloud component and it was Netsuite’s cloud focus that fitted them best. According to Locklin the fit was good enough from the onset that the two companies were soon talking about a close alliance rather than just a loose relationship.

Traditionally, integration between PLM and ERP is a very painful process. One of the aspects of complexity can be attributed to differences between PLM and ERP technologies and APIs. Cloud cannot solve the complexity of PLM/ERP integration – it is still hard to make it happen. But, cloud technologies can simplify the integration process by establishing common technological grounds for companies creating business on top of PLM-ERP integrations. Jitterbit a company both NetSuite and Autodesk are partnering to integrate PLM360 and NetSuite. Jitterbit is a software outfit built specifically to integrate cloud applications.

Having worked with it as a core part of the Autodesk partnership, the relationship has now spread to NetSuite, which has also formed its own partnership with Jitterbit. It is now being used to provide NetSuite users with connections to over 250 applications. This was formally launched at the recent SuiteWorld conference in San Jose.

What is my conclusion? Cloud is changing businesses and product boundaries. The traditional boundaries of CAD, PDM, PLM and ERP business suites were created by many years of selling on premise products using established partner channels. Cloud removes barriers between applications makes it more transparent. What about business? Will cloud remove barriers between PLM and ERP? Will it create a more granular set of applications provided by multiple software vendors and orchestrated by ERP service providers? The time is to change a traditional marriage relationships between PLM and ERP that I can see conflicting in many ways. Are we going to see Cloud (PLM+ERP) product offering soon? I’m not sure about that, but changes are clearly coming to manufacturing domain. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg


PLM, Upgrades and Competition

June 1, 2015

plm-competition-and-upgrades

Traditional PLM wisdom says to buy PLM system is a complex process. Once you decided for a specific platform or technology, it will be very hard to change or replace with something else. I’ve been skimming social network news this morning The following tweet from @jonathanpscott caught my attention – “More details on the #ENOVIA #SmarTeam User Group meeting in OH next week ht.ly/NzuwE #PLM“. I’ve been involved into SmarTeam development many years ago and I’m aware Dassault System is still supporting the system. However, the following message from the agenda – “ENOVIA SmarTeam – a safe place to be”, increased my curiosity up even more. Future in the agenda you can see topics related to SmarTeam migration and co-existence.

It made me think about lifecycle of PLM systems and implementation more. What is the average cycle time for PLM implementation? How often companies are replacing PLM systems and what does it mean for a company in terms of effort, planning, operation and support?

Earlier this month I came across Aras Corp. materials about “resilient PLM”. If you haven’t heard about this new PLM buzz, navigate to the following link to read more. The term was coined by Aras to explain how Aras Innovator’s technology can withstand multiple upgrades and changes. Peter Schroer, Aras CEO is explaining about resilient PLM in the following video. Pay attention to the following part of the video explaining how Aras customers successfully moved between different versions of Aras on different databases – Postgress, Oracle, Microsoft SQL for the last 15 years.

Cloud technologies is another way to solve the problem of upgrades. Jim Brown of Tech-Clarity and Brian Roepke of Autodesk are discussing the advantages of cloud PLM. Watch the following video from 6:05 when Brian speaks about upgrades and revision lock. The upgrade sometimes even more expensive than initial implementation. According to Brian Roepke, cloud PLM technologies are solving the problem of upgrades and migrations in traditional PLM implementations.

Migration of PLM solutions can be significant driver in fundamental strategic decisions manufacturing companies are taking. Earlier last week Siemens PLM announced about the successful completion of PLM2015 project and move from CATIA to NX. Daimler’s decision was heavily influenced by the preference not to move between two PLM systems (Teamcenter and ENOVIA). Read about it in Schnitgercorp blog Reaching that one customer in a PLMish landscape. Here is the passage, which explains the reason:

Daimler‘s decision to move from CATIA to NX, huge as it was, was ultimately made by a team that weighed the benefits and risks in a more limited context than the overall Siemens portfolio. As I understand it, in the end it was simple: Daimler had based many business processes on its Teamcenter implementation; CATIA V6 requires ENOVIA, so Daimler would have had to build links between ENOVIA and Teamcenter to move forward with Dassault Systemes. That was more complicated, to Daimler, than migrating 235,000 “CAD objects” and retraining 6,000 people.

What is my conclusion? PLM upgrade or migration is sensitive and complicated process. It requires a lot of resources and can be very costly. In the current state of manufacturing and PLM technology customers are looking how to insure many years of operation once they implemented the system. However, business is changing and the need to be flexible is striking back as a conflicting requirement. Combined together it brings a very interesting flavor into PLM competition. The ability to implement PLM system and upgrade an existing (often outdated) PLM implementation becomes a key feature in the future competitiveness of PLM system. It is equally important for cloud and non-cloud implementations. I think the PLM vendor and technology capable to do so can gain a lot of traction in the future. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Image courtesy of iosphere at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

 



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 285 other followers