A blog by Oleg Shilovitsky
Information & Comments about Engineering and Manufacturing Software

PLM Think Tank Top 5 – November, 2010

PLM Think Tank Top 5 – November, 2010
Oleg
Oleg
2 December, 2010 | 3 min for reading

I was reading GigaOM article Should We Be Afraid of Apple, Google and Facebook? I found it interesting. Take your time, read and make an opinion. I found some comparison about past and present monopolies interesting. Here is the thought about information monopolies – “AT&T was a monopoly during an earlier phase of communications history, companies like Google, Facebook and Apple now have what he calls “information monopolies” that could be just as damaging to our society”. I found some interesting association between “information monopolies” and CAD/PLM system monopolies. For many years, CAD system monopoly was considered the most strongest option in the engineering world. The decision of Daimler may prove it different. However, it will be a start for a new monopoly – information or data monopoly. PDM system can lock a big customer almost with the same level of efficiency. The time between two monopolies can be interesting… And now, here is my top 5 posts for November.

Daimler PLM Dilemma – PDM First

Cost is important. In 2000s , the decision CAD vs. PDM was almost always CAD +  any PDM Integration. Which means – CAD First. We learned something new this week. PDM and Data Management becomes more and more important. The cost of global product data platform change and potential IT disruption is much bigger compared to the cost switching to another CAD. So, in 2010s, the math CAD <or> PDM is different and the answer is probably PDM change + IT cost. Which means PDM and product data backbone first. This is an important difference, which will have an implication on engineering and manufacturing software decisions of the current decade. PDM system position can give some advantages in the PLM giant wars for large automotive and aerospace OEM accounts. Questions about cost of change and untapped PLM markets are more interesting, in my view.

PTC Creo – AnyThing Possible?

These are my thoughts followed by PTC Lightening event and introducing of Creo applications. I think, PTC demonstrated a very good understanding of market and customer. They are presenting a plan to deliver solutions answering a set of well known problems. To identify problems right is already more than 50% in the delivery process. Let see how many PTC Creo Apps we’ll see in the future…

Microsoft in the PLM Spotlight

My observations driven by Microsoft presentation during the Dassault customer event earlier this month in Orlando. Microsoft sells servers to the enterprise. Big servers. Lots of servers. OWPX. Is it a strategy? In my view, this is Microsoft’s enterprise lock-in. On the very bottom level, PLM functions depend on Microsoft Servers. Most of PLM boxes run on Windows machines. And it deeply connected on Office / Excel. However, future belongs to experience – the number of Apple devices on DSCC2010 was bigger than ever before.

Why Do We Struggle With File Names in PDM/PLM?

This a type post that turns a conversation towards endless discussions about naming in PDM/PLM systems and how cloud will influence it. The File Name is dead. Long live file names! I can see a long term trend towards the situations where File Names will become obsolete. We still need file names. Even such a cool device as iPad, requires a file name get things in and out. So, for day-to-day practice, you better think about reasonable file numbering system. However, if you are going to implement  modern PDM/PLM system, you can consider starting to remove file names as an obsolete feature and hide it in data management structures.Just my thoughts…

PLM+ERP: Outside of Equation?

Another timeless story. Engineering and Manufacturing. PDM and ERP. One of the fundamental principles behind PLM+ERP equation is an event driven process push. Many manufacturing companies and software vendors got into this for the last 10-15 years. It was an obvious way to solve PLM+ERP equation.  It makes systems dependent and costly to manage. One of the fundamental ideas that may improve it is to get out of this equation. The name of the idea is “Pull”. Pull can make systems independent and much easy managed.

Best, Oleg

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
4 February, 2013

Fun and coolness are trending topics these days. Are you doing boring business or having fun? Fun is much better...

9 July, 2015

You cannot stop innovation. Global manufacturing environment and changing technological landscape is a good foundation to think about how to...

16 March, 2017

Engineering software is slowly moving towards cloud. Vendors, industry pundits and even customers are in a full agreement that cloud...

17 May, 2016

Few weeks ago I posted a story about cloud CAD and Dropbox Infinite Project. Apparently it was not only me...

18 February, 2025

Have you ever tried playing billiards on a boat? No? Well, let me paint you a picture. Imagine setting up...

25 August, 2009

Yesterday, two separate article got my attention and brought me to think about Lifecycle. Alternatively, even more, about number of...

3 June, 2024

The summer slowdown time is a great opportunity to focus on the technology retooling and new tools section. It is...

25 November, 2013

Collaboration is still one of the hot topics in PLM space. I was watching PLM TV report about Dassault’s 3DEXPERIENCE...

12 August, 2010

Scaling up is a tough problem. I want to talk today and PLM Software scalability in unusual aspects – business...

Blogroll

To the top