PLM, Kenesto and Process Experience

February 17, 2012

Kenesto just did the first appearance at SolidWorks World 2012 in San Diego. It was a good opportunity, to see Kenesto product in public. So, I did. I’ve been posting about Kenesto before. Navigate to the following link to read my previous post – PLM and Process Tools: Opportunity or Complication? So, I sat down with Kenesto team for the demonstration (disclosure – I’m serving as an adviser to Kenesto).

The big idea – flexible processes

The idea of Kensto is to move away from rigidity of process management and workflows – it called routes. You can push process flow to any person you want. It is fundamentally different from many BPM and PLM process tools that require you to define process flowchart before actually you are going to use it. From that standpoint, Kenesto just helping you "to document processes". This is about flexibility and ease of use. Here is the process that was built during the presentation:

Kenesto and Cloud

Cloud is another differentiation of Kensto. You don’t need to have to installed and configure the system. The only thing you need is to access it via browser. Kenesto runs on AWS. You can see the following picture of Kenesto architecture (taken from Kenesto whitepaper)

What is interesting to notice is the diagram on the bottom – three information objects (processes, documents, structures). I can see them as potential data models for PDM or PLM system. However, nothing was mentioned about these plans.

Kenesto Challenges

The idea of Kenesto is simple and I like it. I can see some challenges related to the way Kenesto communicates with ‘on-premises’ solutions. What I’ve seen during the demo, was only related to uploading of files. However, I’d be interested to see how customers will use Kenesto in a real life. Currently, in a beta version, Kenesto definitely is going to learn more about it.

Kenesto People

To make the story social, here are few pictures of people behind the Kenesto team. Sorry for not capturing all of you, guys – will do it next time.

What is my conclusion? All components of Kenesto are not unique. But here is the deal. Similar to iPod assembled by Apple from components available to everybody, Kenesto uniqueness is in experience it provides to a user. This is in my view, a secret sauce behind what company is doing. Experience is important. Bernard Charles, CEO of Dassault Systems was talking about "3D experience" during SWW 2012. Will Kenesto invent new "process experience"? Time will show. It has a potential. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Disclosure: I’m serving as an external adviser to Kenesto.

1 Comment | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

SolidWorks and PLM Story

February 13, 2012

I’m attending SolidWorks World these days in a sunny San Diego, California. If you are in the engineering and manufacturing, it is probably "must go" event for you. Of course, if you are using SolidWorks and Dassault software. However, even if you’re not, it is a great place to see people and have some hands-on technology. I’ve been told by SolidWorks exec that SWW 2012 is expecting to have 5500 registered attendees this year and also few hundreds of "walk-in" visitors. As I promise, I will be following up SolidWorks World with my "PLM eye" to see what is going on and what PLM technologies and products you can expect to see here.

SolidWorks and Data Management… Meh?

Long time ago, I had a conversation with former CEO of SolidWorks John McEleney, who said – data-management pain is what slow down every SolidWorks deal. By the way, I still agree with John – along all these years, SolidWorks was very careful with regards to what data-management technology (PDM, PLM) is used by SolidWorks customers and sold by SolidWorks partners. Both PDM products SolidWorks used to have (and still selling with SolidWorks) are PDM Works Workgroup and Enterprise PDM are the result of acquisitions. SolidWorks selected these products carefully after ensuring that products fit customer needs.

Who is doing SolidWorks PLM today?

There quite many companies these days selling PDM/PLM solutions for SolidWorks. You can see them all on the listSolidWorks Partners (filter for Data Manageemnt and PDM / PLM). Some interesting development was done recently by Aras PLM providing product called EPLM and connected to SolidWorks Enterprise PDM. Read my previous post – Aras, SolidWorks and Disrupting PLM strategies.

SolidWorks and Big Dassault Brother

SolidWorks (oops… Dassault Systems SolidWorks Corp) has deep roots and connection with PLM technologies developed by Dassault and specifically Enovia. Back in 2010 we’ve seen the announcement of SolidWorks claiming development of new products based on Enovia V6. Earlier in 2011, SolidWorks released n!Fuze – first product to do some work between SolidWorks and V6. However, this product was far from full-blown PLM system. You can read my previous post about that – SolidWorks n!Fuze: The Cloud Remake of PLM Collaboration?

SolidWorks World 2012 PLM partners

Who is exhibiting PLM-related stories at SolidWorks World 2012? I found classification of partners is a bit confusing (which is not surprising in PDM / PLM domain). The relevant categories are Data Management, PDM, PLM, Data Interoperability.

Interesting enough, there are only two (!) companies listed in PLM category in SolidWorks partner’s pavilion – Dassault System (link leads us to www.3ds.com) and Kenesto. Kenesto is a new company focusing on Process Management for manufacturing. (disclose – I’m on the advisory board of Kenesto). The CEO of Kenesto, To say that Mike Payne, Kenesto CEO is well-known in CAD industry is probably equal to say nothing (:)). More about Kenesto will be coming later on my blog. Nine companies listed in PDM category (including SolidWorks and Dassault Systems). I’ve seen most of them from the previous years. CIDEON America, Inc., keytech GmbH, MechWorks, SofTech, Inc., SolidPartners, Inc., Synergis Software, xPLM GmbH. Six companies listed as data management. Among them, Aras PLM is clearly PLM vendor. I have to mention Inforbix (disclosure – I’m co-founder). Inforbix provides applications helping people to access product data located in many enterprise systems (e.g. PDM, PLM, ERP) and files (CAD, Excel, PDF).

Separately, you need to take a look on companies providing consulting and implementation services in the manufacturing domain. At the same time, these companies are selling software they develop. In many cases, it is hard to differentiate between software and services they sell. Here is the list of companies from the list of presenters associated with PLM:Datafrond, Infotech Enterprises, Razorleaf Corporation, Zero Wait-State. I hope to learn more about what they offer this year and report on my blog.

Why SolidWorks PLM becomes attractive?

There are few factors that potential can make PLM for SolidWorks story attractive these days. First of all – PLM is getting traction. Five years ago, when you talk with people about PLM, you might be hearing "why" question. These days, the question you can hear is "how?". I think it makes a difference between 2007 and 2012. Another aspect is a competitive landscape. Long time SolidWorks rival Autodesk is coming to PLM. As you probably read before on my blog, Autodesk is about to release their Nexus PLM on the cloud very soon. In my view, it creates another level of pressure on SolidWorks execs and an opportunity for customers to come with compelling SolidWorks PLM story.

What is my conclusion? I expect to have more conversation about PLM and SolidWorks in coming days. Stay tuned to my blog and twitter. I’m looking forward to giving you more information and updates about what will happen in coming days in San-Diego.

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PDM/PLM Evolution: Final Step and Cloud / On-Premises Integration

February 10, 2012

Cloud race is here. You can see it by how companies are actively acquiring all possible and impossible cloud assets. Just to mention few examples that might be interesting to know. Navigate to the following link Oracle pays 1.9B to Taleoto read about this acquisition. Taleo, which has about 1,400 employees, said it has more than 5,000 customers, including nearly half of the Fortune 100. Through its software, people can apply for jobs and companies can manage the careers of their hires.

This acquisition is definitely come to balance Oracle’s rival SAP, which acquired SuccessFactor for 3.4B. SuccessFactors, based in San Mateo, Calif., is a big maker of cloud-based human resources applications. The company focuses on applications for managing relationships with employees, such as organizing and developing performance reviews and bonuses. The company says it has more than 3,500 customers. It lost 12.5 million on 205.9 million in revenue last year.

Another interesting acquisition just came out to press few days ago, and it is actually in CAD/PLM space. Dassault is acquiring Netvibes. Netvibes is a website for dashboards. Netvibes, the San Francisco–based company that allows people and brands to create personalized RSS and social media feed dashboards. The dollar amount is incomparable, but the trend is clear, in my view. Cloud assets become interesting.

In my post few days ago, I was discussing PDM/PLM evolution. You can read more by navigating to the following link. This picture will give you an idea of my thinking of where PDM/PLM evolution is going – to the cloud.

However, I think my post was missing one picture, which explains the final step. Please take a look on the picture below. Here is my point – moving actually CAD on the cloud will be the final step.

What is my conclusion? I want to stress this point – CAD will be the latest application in the list of PDM, PLM and other business services to move to the cloud. What is interesting to me is how vendors are going to support this "cloud transition". Companies clearly won’t be able to move all in a single shot. So, we can expect a long time when cloud and on-premises application will co-exist. That drive me to another discussion… tomorrow. I’m taking off to SolidWorks World. Follow my tweeter and watch my blog from time to time. SolidWorks World coverage with "spicy PLM flavor" is about to begin.

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM Think Tank Top 5 – January, 2012

February 10, 2012

I’m coming to SolidWorks World 2012 this weekend. SWW is always a special event for me. This year, SolidWorks World is very interesting. Last two years were under the mark of ‘something happens’ at SolidWorks. It started as the "cloud announcements" during SWW 2010 and later on, hints on SolidWorks V6 running on top of CATIA platform. Few months ago, we’ve seen the exodus of two executives – SolidWorks founder Jon Hirschitick and VP R&D Austin O’Malley. Taking all these things together and you have a perfect event where everything will be re-evaluated, challenged, validated and tested. I’m looking forward to listen to from new VP R&D – VP R&D, Gian Paolo Bassi. Also, I’d be interested to catch some stories about Netvibes acquired by Dassault just few days ago (don’t miss Netvibes SolidWorks World 2012 dashboard). It sounds like we are going to learn a lot during coming SolidWorks World. Beyond PLM will be in San Diego, and I promise you the best possible coverage of SolidWorks World with spicy PLM flavor :) . Now, let me turn down to my traditional list of Top 5 posts from January.

PLM: Mobile-optimized Sites vs. Mobile Apps

PLM vendors followed technological and consumer trends to develop mobile applications. It sounds as a very important strategy these days, which cause huge interest from companies, users, analysts and industry watchers. Taking into account the long development cycle of enterprise applications and speed of adoption in manufacturing domain, I think software companies better have been not only short – term, but some longer-term development strategy that will allow them to jump to the next trend when it comes. For the moment, let’s rock available PLM mobile apps on iTunes app store and Android Market.

Visiting PTC HQ: Social Link, AnyBOM, Mobile and more…

You are probably familiar with statements “beavers do what beavers do”. Don’t expect beavers to build PLM. Beavers build dams. So, PTC is a “beaver type” company. PTC builds Product Lifecycle Software. Don’t expect them to build something else. They will talk to you about CAD, BOM, Parts, Assemblies, Configurations. The biggest question – will PTC shake the industry with Creo – is still not answered, in my view. They are clearly moving towards that goals. However, the speed is important.

Future PLM platforms and SAP / Oracle technological wars

The complexity of enterprise PLM software is skyrocketing. PLM products are running on proven, but outdated platforms. My hunch – all major PLM vendors having some future technology platform projects on their back-burner. I don’t know if it comes as Enovia V7, TeamCenter Future or Creo Enterprise. What is clear to me is that PLM companies need to come with the next technological platforms to leverage last 10 years development of web and consumer space. Otherwise, they will be dismissed by newcomers. ERP vendors such as Oracle and SAP also keep stakes in this enterprise software game and need to be watched carefully by PLM players.

PLM and the evolution of integration

I think, integration will become even more important soon. There are two main reasons for that. 1- companies are looking how to deliver business solutions faster. To create three years integration project is not an option anymore. Information availability for decision making or cross-department optimization becomes a top priority for IT. 2- cloud. Many companies are checking how to deliver hybrid on-premise/cloud solutions. To take data exchange to cloud won’t an option any more. Future data federation will introduce new web technologies to PLM integration space.

Aras Corp: Different PLM and new open office

I found Aras more focused on the competition with major PLM suppliers – TeamCenter, Enovia and Windchill than before. To me, it is good and bad signs at the same time. It is presents the level of maturity of Aras platform and solutions – it is interesting to see how emerging platform like Aras can compete with mature products coming from large top 3 PLM vendors. Even so, I’d like to hear more about Aras community. I found some community examples such as “feature roadmap voting” interesting. However, I haven’t seen any public numbers about how Aras community is growing. Strong community base can become a much stronger competitive factor for Aras than a feature by feature comparison with TeamCenter and other PLM vendors.

For those of my friends and colleagues, who is San-Diego bound, I’m looking forward to seeing you during SWW 2012.

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM and Selling Data

February 10, 2012

Manufacturing companies aggregating a lot of data these days. Data is coming from many places. For many years, product development, manufacturing and supply chain was major sources of data in companies. Nowadays, data is coming from outside of a company. Internet, social network and communication created new source of information. The intersection of data from inside of a company and outside data is a very interesting place. I’ve been reading Forester blog – Mo’ data mo’ problems few days ago written by Clarence Villanueva. The publication discusses a potential value of data created during marketing campaigns. Here is a quote:

…a client was looking to have a marketing company take its point-of-sale (POS) data to prepare email campaigns. Upon closer review of the contracts, data ownership was ambiguously defined and nested in three separate areas: the Master Services Agreement (MSA), SOW, and an addendum. When you trace the definition through the various documents, the only thing made clear on data ownership was that the campaigns resulting from the ETL (extract, transform, load) process were owned by the client. What about the POS data that was sent over to the marketing services company?

This example made me think about multiple cases when manufacturing companies as well as outside companies such as suppliers, service providers and many other entities can create an interesting value from the combination of the data owned by them – product information, sales information, contracts, customer data, etc. Imagine PLM software will be able to combine these pieces of data into valuable assets.

What is my conclusion? I think PLM has an opportunity to convert data into valuable assets. I can see more companies adopting PLM these days. Cloud PLM will provide an additional opportunity to connect data coming from multiple sources – supply chain, subcontractors and customers. Sounds like an important topic and cool opportunity. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

Software Vendors and PDM/PLM Evolution Steps

February 9, 2012

Earlier this week, I had a conversation with engineering IT manager of a manufacturing company. Without mentioning names, we’ve been discussing how manufacturing companies are adopting technologies in general and PDM/PLM technologies specifically. According to him, software companies largely misunderstood the way manufacturing companies perceive technology adoption. The conclusion we made, was that manufacturing companies are very slow to adopt any technologies. One of the key factors that impacts future evolution of PDM/PLM technologies will cost of implementation and changes. This conversation made me think about what will be the evolution of PDM / PLM systems for coming decades.

Cloud, Unification and Integration

I can define three things that will lead future evolution in PDM / PLM. It is unification, integration and cloud. I wrote about Unification and Integration few months ago. Navigate to the following article – From PDM to PLM: Unify or Integrate? to have a sense of this topic. The reality of manufacturing companies today are that they have lots of different software packages implemented. Siloed approach was dominant in the last two decades. The question of how to move forward to the next level is actively debated by many software vendors and customers. One of the options is to move to unified systems. When it sounds like an interesting option to cut cost of integration, the overall cost of migration stops many companies from taking this approach. On the other side, affordability of cloud-based software sounds like a good reason to move one and offer new type of solutions with a fraction of cost.

4 Steps of PDM / PLM evolution

In my view, cloud (private and public) will be playing a key role in the evolution of future PDM/PLM systems. On the diagram below, I pictured how I see the evolution of PDM /PLM systems. Four steps show how I think systems will be migrating from pure “on-premises’” solution to full cloud adoption.

PDM / PLM Evolution

 

I wanted to bring 3 factors that will become critical to define vendor’s success in this evolution – cloud/on-premises balance, system integration and file content migration to the cloud. Let me talk separately about each of these factors.

Cloud / On-Premises balance

The adoption of new technologies and products is very slow. Because of that, manufacturing companies will have to balance long time between existing and new solutions. The ability of vendor to bring systems gradually to solve real business needs in an affordable way, will be a key to success. Nobody will be able to replace all systems in a single shot.

System integration

I’ve been stated it many times already, but again, the ability to integrate cloud and on-premises solution will be another key capability. Today, the integration is very messy. It is costly and, in most cases, causes data duplication with a lot of inefficiency. The ability to build linked data grid of integrated solutions will create a competitive advantage for software vendors to introduce new PDM / PLM solutions and minimize implementation cost.

File Content migration

The absolute majority of product information such as CAD data is located on premises today. With the introduction of new solutions, this content will have to migrate to cloud in order to become available also for people (globally) as well as to be re-used by different cloud and on-premises solutions. The effectiveness of this migration is another key factor to success.

What is my conclusion? I see next 10 years of PDM / PLM evolution as a very interesting time. Old technologies and software packages will retire and new will be coming. What will be the future of PLM platforms is an interesting question. This question needs to be answered by well established PLM vendors like Dassault, Siemens, PTC and by newcomers such as Autodesk. Smaller companies will innovate to provide PLM solutions and technologies that potentially can disrupt and, at the same time, provide a competitive advantage to future evolution of PDM / PLM platforms. What is your take? Speak your mind, please…

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

Part numbers and External Classification Schemas

February 8, 2012

fingerprint-253x300.jpgI want to talk about Part Numbers. Yes, Part Numbers, again… My previous blog -Part Numbering and the future of identification raised few interesting conversations. So, I decided to open a Pandora box of part numbering. The formal trigger for this conversation was Arena Solutions blog – Three consideration when choosing Part Numbering schema for you. Here is passage that actually made me think about the fact we are doing something wrong:

Choosing a part numbering scheme is one of the more important decisions you make as you move toward production… Once you commit to a part numbering scheme, you are married to it for a long time to come, so you need to be 100% sure it is nimble enough to evolve and scale right along with you...

It sounded like a Catholic marriage. Once you decided about part numbering, you are done for many years. The same Arena’s blog post mentioned some external tools you can use to generate part numbers – part-numbering.com and partnumber.com.

The idea that stroke me earlier today is that most of the companies are using “smart Part Numbers” in order to simplify part search, re-use and, even more fundamentally, classification. Type of part, organization, suppliers – these are only small elements of “an intelligent part number”. What if some “smart applications” are available that can add classification information to existing part numbers in order to enrich (actually to annotate) Part Number identification. These tools can be web-based and even applied to existing data in the company.

What is my conclusion? We need to re-think some very fundamental elements and concepts of product development, PDM and PLM. The ability to enrich data without building lots of sophistication in the Part Numbering is something that can make PDM / PLM systems more flexible and drive cost of changes down. I’d be interested how to support it in existing PDM/PLM systems. Not sure if it is a simple task. However, I’m curious if new PLM software coming tomorrow to market from companies like Autodesk will have a different set of capabilities to solve the problem of Part Numbering and identification. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

2 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

Social PLM and anti-social efficiency

February 6, 2012

Social is one of the topics I’m discussing frequently on my blog. Today, I would like to take a different angle on social and collaboration. I was reading Real Time Rick blog – Commenting PLM, Workplace Efficiency and my iPod. Rick was talking about PLM, collaboration and what is required sometime to get the job done. Here is an interesting passage from Rick’s post:

While I would never be called an ‘introvert’, I do find that my best work is done with my office door closed and my iPod just loud enough to block any background noise. I find my mind wanders if it’s too quiet; I need to have something to listen to. I wind up joining conversations that are going on outside my door. Next thing you know, I’ve lost an hour or three.

It made me think about some modern "social trends". Walking into many offices lately, I figured out one interesting trend – massive migration of people into "open" (aka more social and collaborative) workspace. According to companies, environment in such type of offices is provoking people to "collaborate" and working more efficiently. I’ve heard exactly this opinion when visited new offices of Dassault Systems in Waltham, MA.

I decide to dig a bit inside. Navigate your browser to the following article – Open Office Space: The Good, Bad and Ugly. Have a read. I found this article quite interesting discussing in details all pros and cons of open office. The following two opinions convincing pro and against open office caught my special attention:

Why open space is bad: A study by Australian scientists published in the Asia-Pacific Journal of Health Management concludes that open space offices are bad for employee health. The research found that in 90% of cases studied, “the outcome of working in an open-plan office was seen as negative, with open-plan offices causing high levels of stress, conflict, high blood pressure, and a high staff turnover.” Germs are also more easily transmitted, leading to more employee sickness and a loss of production. Another negative risk to the company’s bottom line is the potential for theft of company secrets. In an open office space, the odds of someone seeing or hearing confidential or business-sensitive information increases considerably. And a leakage of proprietary information can not only destroy profits but can destroy entire companies too.

Why open space is good: It’s not hard to see how an open office design can facilitate more teamwork and better communication. In support of this premise, a 1996 research study published in the Harvard Business Review revealed that companies that had modified their business processes by, among other things, migrating from private spaces to open environments realized performance increases averaging 440 percent.

It made me think about modern trends of social software. Social software can solve some problems of open space location and at the same time still to support advantages of working in "online" open space.

Looking for some numbers to support ideas of how social software improves productivity in manufacturing companies, I found results of research published by Jim Brown in his Social Innovation Crystal Ball Prediction for 2012. Take a look on the picture below. Numbers are self-explaining.

What is my conclusion? Here is my "anti-social" efficiency conflict. I like social environment and social software. However, when I need to get my job done, I need to switch off my phone, disconnect twitter, close my email and focus on what I’m doing. So, thinking about various social innovations, I remember about how to have the ability to close my office door… Just my thoughts.

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM architecture discussion with Peter Schroer of Aras

February 3, 2012

If you followed my comments on one of previous posts – Cloud PLM and IT Basic Instincts, I promised to have a conversation with Aras about PLM architecture. On Wednesday, I had a chance to visit Aras Corp. office in Andover, MA and had long conversation with Peter Schroer, CEO of Aras. The idea behind the conversation was to discuss benefits of Aras PLM architecture. Aras is aggressive in their goal to displace existing PLM systems – TeamCenter,ENOVIA and Windchill. When you think about how a company of less than 100 people can do, you would be trying to find “killer innovation” in technology and/or business. So, this conversation was about technology. Obviously, some charts presented by Peter cannot be shared in public. So, here my “collage” of the conversation to give you feeling of the atmosphere :) .

History and PLM Architecture

Aras Corp. is probably the newest PLM software created from the scratch back in 2001. Top 3 major PLM systems were created as a result of multiple mergers, acquisitions and additional development. It doesn’t say anything about what system is better. However, coming later to the game provides some clear advantages – learning from previous mistakes and use of advanced technology.

PLM functional architecture

This is my simplified view on PLM functional architecture. It can be applied to many PDM/PLM systems developed for the last two decades (actually, it can be applied to non-PLM systems too). Almost all PLM systems were built on top of RDBMS (the exception known to me was MatrixOne, which runs on object database – Objectivity, but migrated to Oracle later). A very essential layer is ORM (Object Relation Mapper) converting RDBMS into object store and providing the data model to build PDM/PLM applications. The characteristics on ORM are important and define the level of flexibility and basic functional capabilities. Business layer (API) and applications and solutions introduced functionality of the system, including core functions, integrations with desktop and enterprise systems as well as many others.

PLM functional architecture

Almost all PDM/PLM systems passed the trajectory of development started from the so-called “toolkit” to “solutions” with many intermediate stations. This is a place where commonality ends. Different vendors put their own functional priorities as well as specific technological and implementation choices.

At the same time, I would define ORM as one of the core capabilities of every PDM/PLM system to provide an engine to implement multiple functions. In many cases, the capability of ORM defines so called “data modeling” capabilities. It is important to differentiate technological capabilities and marketing buzzwords. One of the characteristics of ORM is to use a certain level of RDBMS capabilities can be a differentiation. RDBMS (e.g. Oracel and MS SQL) is a very mature technology. DB vendors developed highly sophisticated mechanisms to support multiple data modeling capabilities. To use a right combination of RDBM data modeling can impact significantly future capabilities of PLM system.

What is my take on Aras?

In general, I don’t think Aras’ principle architecture is different from Enovia, TeamCenter and Windchill. The implementation technique can vary, but it will deliver most of the functions available in other PDM/PLM systems. On the other side, devil is in details. Coming late to the game (around 2000), Aras had a chance to learn from many mistakes made by PDM/PLM vendors during 1990s. It is an important advantage of Aras. I’ve seen lots of focus on flexibility and efficiency, which can create implementation differentiations and potentially lead to the advantages in implementation and maintenance cost. However, these things are hardly can be visible by just reviewing architecture and can be only proven by real work.

What about other players?

I can see some similarity between Aras architecture and Enovia V6, TeamCenter and Windchill. Aras claims to be lean compared to other systems, I can see some reasons why. At the same time, these claims cannot be taken in a broad range and requires detailed discussion. I found some similarity between Aras and MatrixOne (both companies were founded around I-495 in MA :) ). One more vendor to be mentioned here – Autodesk. We don’t have official detailed information about what is inside of Nexus PLM. It will be interesting to get inside of Nexus technology and see it (as soon as Nexus PLM will be released).

What is my conclusion? PLM architecture influences two major characteristics of the system – flexibility and cost of change. Vendors understand it. You can see different marketing terms here – dynamic modeling, insanely configurable, etc. There are no direct dependencies between how each element of architecture impact flexibilty and cost of change. At the same time, overall, it does matter. In modern PLM world, these two things will drive future success of PLM systems and vendors. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Freebie. Aras marketing wasn’t involved, and no censorship was applied to the content of this post.

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM and Amazon Enterprise Cloud

February 1, 2012

An interesting addition to my yesterday post about technological options for cloud PLM. I was reading Amazon’s announcement that came earlier this month – Amazon separates servers from IP addresses. Navigate to the ZDnet UK Blog article “Amazon Separates Servers From IP Addresses to read more. Here is how this feature explained in Amazon blog:

Today we are adding additional flexibility to EC2 instances running in the Virtual Private Cloud. First, we are teasing apart the IP addresses (and important attributes associated with them) from the EC2 instances and calling the resulting entity an ENI, or Elastic Network Interface. Second, we are giving you the ability to create additional ENIs, and to attach a second ENI to an instance (again, this is within the VPC).

On the picture below you can see how Amazon explains the topology of EIN.

Cloud PLM

There are two CAD / PLM vendors officially announced their support for cloud – Autodesk and Dassault. Nexus 360 PLM is a cloud PLM coming from Autodesk later this year. Dassault ENOVIA is a flagship product sold by Dassault. Another PLM company claims their support cloud is Aras Corp. I haven’t heard any specific cloud plans from Siemens PLM and PTC. If you’re in discussion with your CAD / PLM vendor these days, you better check if product cloud configuration supports EIN.

What is my conclusion? Even the article is a bit on a technical side, I found it quite important. Cloud is moving towards having more and more “enterprise features”. This is a reaction of cloud providers on the coming demand from enterprise IT to accept cloud usage. The critical question that wasn’t answered was about the cost. Cloud attractiveness is dependent on cost structure. Cloud providers will have to charge an additional fee for enterprise features. Will it be still attractive for company IT? A big question. The architecture of cloud systems is in a very early beginning phase. You better check it carefully with your vendors and/or partner. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers