The ability to use PLM in downstream applications was always a challenge. There are multiple reasons for that – complexity of products, expensive licenses, long implementation cycle. At the same time, the value of downstream application is huge. The amount of data that organization can proliferate downstream is growing – it is 3D/2D CAD models and drawings, manufacturing planning information, technical documentation, RFQ for suppliers and many others. I had a chance to read CAD CAM News few days ago. The article is how PROSTEP develops of 3D PDF generator to facilitate information exchange in the organization. The title was catchy – PROSTEP packages the whole world of engineering in a 3D PDF document. Here is my favorite passage:
PROSTEP PDF Generator 3D allows the server-based extraction of all types of engineering data from the respective CAD, PLM or ERP systems and the embedding of this data in 3D PDF documents. In addition, the container function allows native CAD data, Word documents, pictures and video clips to be added to these documents. Depending on the rights granted by the document owner, the contents can be visualized, copied, printed and/or annotated with Adobe Reader. “Intelligent” templates allow information to be entered into fields on forms or incorporated in dynamic bar codes so that it is automatically evaluated upon return and transferred to the backend systems.
It made me think about the approach. Data is extracted from files, PDM/PLM and ERP systems. The 3D PDF file is generated. Then files can be distributed downstream in the organization and among suppliers. Adobe reader is the only application that needed for this purpose. You can navigate to the following link to see examples of 3D PDF file generated for different purposes.
The advantages of this approach is clear. Files can be sent everywhere and accessed by any person in the organization. No need for licenses. Adobe interface is simple enough. However, what is the potential downside? In my view, connectivity (or potential “dis-connectivity”) is one of them. Information “packed” into 3D PDF file is similar to the other file-oriented solution (i.e. Excel files with Bill of Materials). The ability to have an updated information re-packed again can be critical to provide “timely” information downstream.
What is my conclusion? To find a reliable way to make the information available downstream is critical for many organizations. 3D PDF seems to be as an option. The file-orientation paradigm helps current users to achieve their goal in an easy way. However, the “packing” a whole system into set of files seems to me problematic. The synchronization, run for updated information can become a nightmare. Just my thoughts… What is your opinion?
Best, Oleg
Are you familiar with the “Killer App” syndrome? In my view, conversations about a “Killer App” are very popular when some technological device or broad technological innovation needs to be proven. Killer App becomes so popular that return on the technology becomes obvious. I can bring some examples of Killer Apps in the past: VisiCalc on Apple II or Lotus 1-2-3 for IBM PC. However, in my view, talks about “killer app” are also a good indication about problems with a product or technology.
The following article caught my attention yesterday: What is the Killer Application for a Modern Engineer? I missed it when it was originally published in January. Chad Jackson, my colleague in the PLM Blogosphere, is talking about CAD, Collaboration and Mashups as examples of killer applications for Engineers. Where I disagree about the “notion” killer application in the context of engineers, I found analyzes Chad made in his post interesting.
Examples of Killer Apps?
CAD App
Personally, I think CAD is a mainstream technology. It was proven by many years. I don’t think, somebody today is designing any product without CAD system. History of CAD passed many waves of technological innovation that moved CAD between 2D, 3D and different computers platforms. I found surprising the fact SolidWorks wasn’t mentioned in the list of CAD products, but the choice of CAD was always somewhat “religious” and Chad’s selection didn’t surprise me.
Collaboration App
The history of various “collaborative applications” in the engineering space, in my view, started by introducing of data management to a wider company audience and following trial to expansion into PDM and PLM. The discussion about what is the killer app for collaboration is on going even today. My favorite collaboration tool for many years is email. Since I moved to Google App, I found it as a good addition to my email experience. PDM and PLM applications are constantly trying to replace email without visible success, in my view.
Mashups
The story of mashup is funny in my view. The word itself came to us from the Internet and Web space where applications (mostly running in the browser) “mashed up” the web content and making it more valuable for end users. The most successful mashup application, in my eyes is Google Map. I wrote about mashup on my blog before (Will Mashup Grow Up in PLM?) In my eyes mashups are interesting, but too vague and unclear from the standpoing of end-user who trying to get a job done.
PLM as a Killer App
In the beginning of 2000s PLM was introduced as a next big thing for engineers and manufacturing. After almost a decade of debates and different technological and product development attempts, I can see Product Lifecycle Management more as a “business and technological strategy” rather than “application”.
Product Development: One Size Doesn’t Fit All?
Now think about design, engineering and manufacturing. It is all so different from various perspectives. Industry specific needs, departments and roles are different. Finally, every manufacturing shop is developing their own strategy for how to compete in the modern world and what can make it unique. If you ask me what application can fit everything, my ultimate answer is simple – Excel. Yes, Excel rocks when it comes to the flexibility and user adoption. The cost of customizing Excel to fit your needs is huge and the cost to support it even bigger (remember my Do you need chief Excel officer to manage BOM?)
What is my conclusion? PLM software vendors and analysts need to stop searching for a next “Killer Application”. Flexibility and granularity are two important directions software vendors need to follow to gain next level of PLM software adoption. Just my opinion, of course. YMMV.
Best, Oleg
I found an interesting article in San-Francisco Gate about Dashboards-
“Introducing Netvibes Dashboard Intelligence Solutions: Business Intelligence Reinvented for the Real-Time Web.” I spent some time watching Netvibies video.
Dashboards
The dashboard approach can simplify information consumption. This approach is interesting and you can digest a bigger amount of valuable information in a much easier way. Dashboard is a popular view in engineering software. To provide one, you usually need to spend lots of time to prepare, test, program, etc. To automate this process, can be an interesting solution.
Social
The unique aspect of Netvibes approach is to focus on social information. These days we are overloaded with the amount of information flowing inside of organization. To be able to categorize and present it to a user is what actually needed.
Tagging
Netvibes is using the technology called “SmartTagging” to process social information. An interesting aspect of this approach is how to mix automatictagging with an ability of users to add additional ones.
What is my conclusion? We produce a lot of information inside of outside of organization. How to digest it? Netvibes provide an interesting approach. Do you think a similar approach can work in other applications? I think yes. However, the process to prepare a dashboard for a particular type of data can be long and cumbersome. Not sure I agree with the approach Netvibes is taking. However, this is the place to innovate. Just my view…
Best, Oleg
The ability to use PLM in downstream applications was always a challenge. There are multiple reasons for that – complexity of products, expensive licenses, long implementation cycle. At the same time, the value of downstream application is huge. The amount of data that organization can proliferate downstream is growing – it is 3D/2D CAD models and drawings, manufacturing planning information, technical documentation, RFQ for suppliers and many others. I had a chance to read CAD CAM News few days ago. The article is how PROSTEP develops of 3D PDF generator to facilitate information exchange in the organization. The title was catchy – PROSTEP packages the whole world of engineering in a 3D PDF document. Here is my favorite passage:
