Aras PLM lines up against Windchill, Enovia, and TeamCenter

by Oleg on May 7, 2011 · View Comments

A week ago, I came back from ACE 2011 (Aras Community Event 2011), which took place in Detroit, MI. Let me propose a very provoking statement: Aras Innovator is on move to replace full fledged PLM products such as TeamCenter, Enovia / MatrixOne and Windchill. Over the 3 days, Aras presented technology, vision and community of people working with Aras Innovator. You can get the highlights and download presentations by navigating to the following link.

Aras: Business Changes and Customization

In the keynote session, Aras’ President and CEO, Peter Schroer, presented the vision of open PLM platform with the ability to maintain a consistent pace of changes during the implementation cycle. Changes are inevitable. For the last years PLM vendors developed strategies to provide out-of-the-box PLM implementations. Aras put focus on “supporting organizational change”.

In addition to that, Aras put a significant focus on their support of Software Customization. Customization of PLM software (and not only PLM), is an important factor impacting PLM implementation TCO. Aras is focusing on how to support customization, and it relates to the Aras Innovator platform capabilities.

Aras and Integration Stories

Integration is an important element of every PLM strategy and implementation. There are multiple aspects of integrations – desktops, CADs, PLM systems and ERP systems. Aras presented a very broad scope of integrations and integration technologies. (note: I was a bit surprised to see existing PLM systems defined as “legacy”).

Aras Innovator introduces multiple APIs and technologies to support integration with different products.

Aras Platform Vision

Started as Windows and Microsoft only, Aras is introducing a broader support of the databases, browsers and other platform-related elements. It was presented as a mix of reality and vision, which not allows you to see what is really happening today. It is clear, Aras is moving towards Linux and broader support of browsers and mobile devices.

Aras Platform and Community

Community and collaborative development are a very interesting aspect of Aras growth strategy. Few slides below shows Aras platform strategy, vision and way to grow solutions by involvement of “community” of partners. As you remember Aras Enterprise Open Source allows to everybody to develop and deploy solutions on top of Aras Innovator. License hassle is minimal.

What is my take on ACE 2011 and Aras Innovator?

Aras is definitely moving towards crossing paths with PLM like Windchill, Enovia, TeamCenter. Is it possible to displace large PLM system with Aras today? My answer – it depends. The PLM implementation scope is varied, and every implementation can be different. Therefore, I specially liked the community oriented approach of development. This is something that can make a difference. On the side of platforms and integrations – time will show if Aras will find a balance between throwing resources and effective delivery. This is a big challenge. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Disclosure: Aras paid for my trip to ACE 2011.

Tagged as: ACE 2011, Aras, Aras Innovator, PLM, PLM Events

RiF

Oleg

Thanks for your analysis. I have been a reseller for Metaphase, MatrixOne and SmarTeam; and a customer for MatrixOne and Windchill. One area that you may wish to discuss is the complexity that the above three vendors have been otaining a licence. As each vendor is used to a high $ value CAD environment, their license models do not consider the infrequent user - the license costs are based on capability not of frequency of use. In my current industry of A&D, only 5 % of the users authour CAD; everone else is either authouring, reviewing or approving documentation, or working within a satellite system for ECAD or SW development.

So with the rigid licensing policies, the three main vendors introduce impediments that stop the distribution of PLM capability. With ARAS, the barrier to distribution is greatly reduced .

Regards
beyondplm

RiF, thanks for your comment. I can see your point. The problem of CAD-vendors is that their business models are tailored to CAD oriented sell. It is hard for them to shift towards something different. Aras has no limitation in this space. So, they have a chance to succeed, in my view. Oleg
Jay

The catch here is that although its called OpenSource, how Aras generates revenue then. Its the Aras Innovator suit, the integrator and other packages which need customization and implementation consultants hourly charges to make Aras work for the BPM.
IMHO, Aras has taken a very right approach and I will tell you how it can kill the other big players. SAP-Business On Demand, PTC PLM on Demand, Agile PLM on Cloud, Teamcenter Mobility, Enovia V6 Unified on cloud, they all are targetting SMEs or bigger companies which need data exchange with their suppliers. Whenever we say cloud, these companies will be reluctant to put the data on cloud even if its hybrid or private.

So bottomline is, these companies will target the PLM which is cheap and easily deployable rather than high money cost and implementation cycle. So Aras wins here.
Secondly, If the IP and complete development methodology lies with the companies and TCO is signed properly, I can see that CIO of the company will never take a headache of migratiing Windchill 9.0 to 10 or Enovia 5 to 6 etc. They will achieve through their IT team with hourly paid to these Aras Consultants.

Another business model, which I think is a winning point, the partnership with local vendors. You can see there are so many partners of Aras and they are not so big companies. Again win-win situation for all. Atos Origin is backing alot to Aras and ofcourse Xerox, Textron and Lear Corporation are there best case studies to show now.

I hope Peter Schroer and his team (Ex Eigner guys, may be they hate Lary alot) succeeds well.

One suggestion, very few now know about Aras on Android, try to put on MeeGo, iOS and new windows mobile app before others do and you will have chery on the cake.

Best Regards,

Jay
beyondplm

Jay, thanks for your comment! I share some of your thoughts about the level of disruption caused by Aras, Open source and free licenses. I'm not 100% agree with you about the cloud. I think, people getting more and more accepted the story about share some data on the cloud, and it becomes more acceptable. Just my thoughts... Oleg
Satish Jay

IMHO the competitive difference should be in the product not the process.
beyondplm

On the other side, the competitive difference can be in implementation. Does it make sense?
Trw188

I have used or seen all of these products over the past 15 years. In my opinion Aras will replace Windchill in many areas (maybe completely) and it will give TeamCenter some good stiff competition. Enovia / MatrixOne is a unique product integration and it has a market demand and need.
I think the product line up is as follows:
For simplicity - Aras, TeamCenter and MatrixOne.

For functionality - MatrixOne, Aras and Teamcenter are tied.
I say this because with customizations they can all meet a companies needs. Some integrations will differ based upon the tools they integrate with due to the other tools like CATIA and ProE proprietary stance and reluctance to allow direct integrations.

I think in the economy we are in and based on the way software GREEN reuse (get the most from the code for the least cost is concerned) Aras is on top. Their opensource approach and fully customizable tools make it a home run for small and medium need companies. It has a very flexible suite of tools much like Adaptive Workspace from Atlantic Software Technologies, Inc http://www.adaptiveworkspace.n... is a software company on the fast track to be in the TOP 3 PLM suppliers very soon.
beyondplm

Trw188, thanks for your comment and insight of the comparison between PLM/PDM packages. I never heard about Atlantic Software. What is that about? Can you share? Best, Oleg
Satish Jay

I had always thought about how customization could provide the competitive edge for companies and wondered why no one was advocating it. The word customization has earned a bad reputation with the IT Management. To them, it means more cost in maintaining the software. However as I started participating in business meetings, I realized the need for following standard configuration management practices. If you take Finance as an example, the process and terminologies are same for all companies. It eliminates confusion and new employees can get to their work straight away, without additional training. If you apply the same concept to PLM, there are standard practices recommended by CMII. If companies do not follow these standard practices, they should be really good in assessing the full impact before customizing it to their needs. I have seen companies where non-standard practices had led to confusion between different departments and resulted in more manual work.
beyondplm

Satish, Thank you for your comment! I think you raised an important point. Finance is a good example where standardization does work. The idea of "standard deployment" was a dream for PLM companies for many years. They succeeded to find how to implement PDM for simple cases (vaulting, revisions, etc.) However, on the broader range in PLM, all trials to apply "standards" here failed. The main reason is a big diversification in how manufacturing companies are running their businesses.. In engineering and manufacturing, processes are different between companies. Best, Oleg
Satish Jay

I agree but I think the processes are different because PLM is relatively a new concept when compared to Finance. Companies are used to operate differently and they are simply not willing to change their processes because of challenges posed by historical/legacy data and impact to downstream systems. My company is one among them where the legacy data format is so embedded in the downstream business process that any standardization would need big changes in those systems (ERP, Service, etc). Management typically do not see the big picture of the PLM system and are not willing for such a change.
beyondplm

Satish, I think you nailed it down. Companies are not willing to change their processes. Legacy data, downstream systems, new business challenges. The idea of Aras about "adaptive systems" is not new. But it seems to me mindshare PLM vendors are pushing for vertical & industry solutions too much. So, in such a type of environment Aras can accelerate deployments and displace Windchill/Enovia/Teamcenter. According to Aras, this is what happens. It would be interesting to see numbers from both sides. Best, Oleg
Orleth

Hi Oleg- You have a story we like to talk about. We have been Teamcenter Reseller. We have been certified for Teamcenter, but it was hard to stay in the time limit while delivering the duties. We had a duty with special requirement to solve before we changed to Aras Innovator. So we became competition to Siemens with Teamcenter. We decided to compete with the Aras Innovator. For the work to show the solution, we had 3 days with Teamcenter and 2 hours with Aras. After an Workshop we had about 40 days for the solution. We won the Project and we have been able to stay in the limit of the 40 days from statement of work. Our customer told us two month ago that Teamcenter was more than 120 days and there were not all duties included. We realized that there are possibilities with Aras Innovator a customer would not do with Teamcenter. And now there comes the best for companies who decide for Aras. The Upgrade for this solution is in the subscription included. Go and ask Siemens to include upgrade in this case. You won’t get it. We are sure Aras Innovator is the better approach.
beyondplm

Hi Reinhard, thanks for your story and sharing of experiences. I'd comment - readers will make their decision and choice. Best, Oleg
@dgsherburne

In my opinion Aras has the right combination of integration, configuration flexibility and scalability to beat the other major players in small to mid size companies. PLM has to be ubiquitous to be widely adopted across internal sites and it must include connection to global the supply chain resources to drive significant ROI. The only business model to float for us was Aras subscription. We have internal expertise being used for deployment and configuration but we are also using using 3rd party implementation services to move more rapidly. So we are taking on some risk with the platform, but this is offset by large upside benefits once the system is in place and we want to expand its use broadly.
beyondplm

David, thanks for your insight! I think you are right and there is a segment of companies that consider price point as a very important element. At the same time, they have enough knowledge, skills and resources to handle PLM implementation internally on top of Aras. As you move to smaller companies, resources won't be there. As you move towards big OEMs, the overall price point will become more important. If I can imagine Aras' implementation for large OEM, the TCO will be almost identical compared to large PLM players. Maybe I'm wrong... However, I'm not sure we have numbers to prove it. Just my thoughts... Best, Oleg
Steve Ammann

Hi Oleg- thanks for sharing this information. For those companies that have the internal talent to combine the right components and manage them ( with Aras support) - this seems like a good model to me. The customer presentation by the Xerox printer division in Wilsonville,Oregon, on their Aras implementation, was an excellent example of this. Insitsu, in Hood River Oregon, is trying the same thing. They have a bright internal resource as well who after an attempt to implement Team Center ( Insitsu part of Boeing, hence the Team center nod) bailed on Team Center for Aras, and I think he should be able to pull it off. Internal company PLM talent - a big plus it seems when going the Aras route. Just my thoughts - Steve
beyondplm

Steve, agree with you. Internal knowledge is a big plus when you are up to PLM project with any system. With other PLM companies, you would probably buy a "service package". In case of Aras, you will have additional options, but fundamentally I don't see a big difference. Since you are not paying for licenses, you can allocate a larger budget towards the implementation. On the other side, you can think about large PLM company developing more features dedicated for you (in case you are big OEM)... Just my thoughts. Best, Oleg
MarcL

Steve - Couldn’t agree more. “Internal company PLM talent - a big plus” when doing any PLM initiative. In fact, probably not a good idea to do a global PLM deployment w/o it :-) That said, we’ve put a lot of effort into making our PLM platform more modern and flexible than any of the others.

A company should be able to cut the resources necessary in half or more vs. required personnel for a Windchill, Teamcenter, ENOVIA or Agile implementation.

We believe that we are putting forth a very different Vision for the future of PLM in large-scale enterprise-wide deployments than the other major providers.
If interested, we’ll be sharing more in a couple weeks http://aras.com/plm/001246
MarcL
http://www.aras.com
Andreas Lindenthal

There are several companies providing implementation and support services for Aras, just like for other PLM systems. One example is Kalypso (http://kalypso.com/landing/ara..., a company focusing on innovation and PLM services. So even if there is no internal talent companies can go the Aras route.
Satish Jay

One should not forget that consulting services are expensive and can quickly burn all the money. If you are saving the licensing cost, why dont you hire an internal resource?
beyondplm

Satish, Thanks for your comments! I tend to agree. Consulting services are expensive. For bigger companies, to hire an external resource won't be a problem. In my view, smaller companies just cannot do it. Best, Oleg
beyondplm

Andreas, thanks for your comment and link sharing. Best, Oleg
Xyzzy

If Aras is open source, where does one go to find the source? Good luck finding it online...
MarcL

Xyzzy - Can get source to Aras solutions http://www.aras.com/communityp... they’re under permissive licenses, mostly BSD and Ms-PL, so no obligation to contribute if you make changes & redistribute.
As Oleg notes, it’s important to know that we are using a mixed source format which combines open source enterprise apps with a community source framework to provide the security that large scale enterprises require. The framework is a freely available download and subscribers get source - by definition not Foss, can read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
By using this enterprise open source structure which mixes formats we provide global companies with flexibility & control over the data schema, business logic, workflows, screens, completely open APIs, etc and highly secure and managed infrastructure.
For what it’s worth, most of the global companies we work with say they wouldn’t be interested if we didn’t do it this way. We believe it is the format of the future.
MarcL
http://www.aras.com
beyondplm

Marc, thanks for clarification! Best, Oleg
beyondplm

Aras defines something they call "enterprise open source". Kinda new way to say "open" in my view. http://www.aras.com/technology.... Time will show if this way will proliferate well.. Best, Oleg