I postponed my monthly writing this month to give few words PTC Creo launch this week. CAD community already started to discuss this event. You cannot dismiss such a type of the event in CAD industry. My initial conclusion about that can be described as following: 1/ consolidation; 2/ people-oriented; 3/ industry knowledge. You can ask me about next CAD revolution. This is something, in my view, requires additional understanding. The technological revolution of PTC Creo is in merging of CoCreate and Pro/E platforms. For the moment, I don’t have enough knowledge to state it. However, it absolutely represents the PTC CAD platforms’ consolidation process. PTC demonstrated a deep understanding of important industry problems. At the same time, the first companies benefiting from Creo solution will be large PTC account focusing primary on PTC platform. I want to put a few special word about people-orientation. This is something very important, since, in my view it following the “consumerization trend” in enterprise IT. Remember, we had a “role-based” story before. The Creo AnyApp, in my view, is a transcription of a “role-based” approach. This idea is a right one. However, the execution of this idea is the most important thing. Apps idea is something that requires the existence of a Platform. The known software or hardware platform playing big games now (Apple Mac, iOS, Android, Windwos Azure etc.). In enterprise, Oracle is trying to turn their offering as a platform. Will PTC Creo become a platform? This is a question we will be discussing during the next 5 years. Now, let’s turn to the list of September’s PLM Think Tank Top5.
In the beginning, I was surprised by popularity of this post. In this post, I put a visual diagram that presents a process of PLM solution selection. The idea was to make it simple to digest in 5 minutes. Main PLM decision these days seems to me in selecting of one of three options – 1/Following mindshare of PLM vendor; 2/Identification of PLM as a part of ERP and 3/ Not seeing PLM as a solution to be used in the product development process. Take a look on this diagram and make your opinion. I hope, you will find it valuable.
This post started by referencing of Google OSI license acceptance. However, the conversation quickly moved to the discussion about the value of Open Source and all details related to usage of Open Source in PLM. The Open Sournce licensing story is damn complicated. However, with a growing interest and influence, understanding of available open source and fee software licenses will be crucial. I think OSS will play an increased role in the future of software.
This post was generated as an answer to one of my readers. The usage of the Find Number and Reference designator is often overlapped and not clear. In addition, there is a significant difference in usage between diverse industries. You can find a long thread of comments and reader opinions sharing their experience and practices in how they use RD and FN. In addition you can find very useful links with related information.
This post was raised by few conversations where I’ve been asked to say how PLM future looks like – BOM or Workflow? I think, this question represents one of the biggest philosophical collide in engineering and manufacturing software. What will be the winning behavior in the future? It is hard to say. In my view, the end-game solution will need to provide answers to both sides of the problem. BOM and Worklow need to be equaly included into PLM solutions. Only together they can keep an organization to manage efficiently product lifecycle. You can read a long list of people’s opinion and shared thoughts about this topic.
The last top 5 this month is related to the comparison of Free and Open Source models. Both “free” and “open source” can create an interesting innovation trend and change today’s status quo. However, I don’t think it is a silver bullet. Businesses have a lot of concerns about “free model”, since everybody understands that, in the end, TCO is important. On the other side, free can make PLM systems widely adopted and not limit to organizations that can pay for PLM licenses. Open Source is a separate story. To have a broad community is one of the main questions to be answered to understand the potential viability of PLM Open Source.