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.
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…
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
