Skip to main content
mkorch14-Alexandrite
14-Alexandrite
February 9, 2010
Question

Survey - Would your company take advantage of Wildfire 5 with Intralink 3.x?

Pro/E User Community,


Wildfire 5 is currently NOT supported with Intralink 3.X. Raytheon is
talking with PTC about the possibility of adding Wildfire 5 support with
Intralink 3.X.

Please respond to this survey if your company is unable to upgrade to
Wildfire 5 at this time due to Intralink data management constraints.



What version of Pro/E are you using now?



Assuming PTC supported Wildfire 5 with Intralink 3.X, would your company
upgrade to Wildfire 5 and when?



What is your data management strategy beyond Intralink 3.X including time
frame?



Please reply to -. I will be compiling feedback to
present to PTC.

Best Regards,

Margi Korch
Raytheon Missile Systems

This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

18 replies

Show previous replies
inkddawg1-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 10, 2010
Mike,

I have worked with many different PDM systems. While I loved Intralink as a very simple control of CAD data I find PDMLink more effective for the entire package. I actually love PDMLink much more. Your comment about ProductView is not accurate as well. I will admit it has had issues but they are being corrected and every time I get an upgrade it is hugely better.

I have worked with the implementation of TeamCenter and others. Cost of managing others ismuch higher then PDMLink and requires much more in admin support. TeamCenter falls way short on much functionality. ProductView, while not perfect, is very effective. The problem people have is "it is something new and different and that is not how I have always done it". Or they just do not like having to follow a very specific set of procedures and process which probably did not exist or was not effective enough. Well, in my opinion and in many cases, whattheyhave been doing is not the best way of doing things and this forces everyone to develop, follow andset processes and procedures to limit waste, rework and production holdup. I am a data and document control freakI like the capabilities of PDMLink and prefer it over most others.

My response is a bit rambling but there is so much more that can be said about this.I am just adding my points as simply as I can.

Just to add another point,my company is not a small one with just a couple productsand in one location.I support a huge user baseof over 150CAD and hundreds of production, purchasing, marketing personnel here in the states and abroad and doing a fairly good job of it, I might add. We are one IT dude to handle server and replica server issues myboss and me. My boss and I cross support each other.


Rex Snider
Engineering Applications Administrator

--- On Wed, 2/10/10, Reece, Mike (HNI Corp) <reecem@hnicorp.com> wrote:

Translate
mreece1-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 10, 2010
Sorry... I said ProductView, and meant ProductPoint


Translate
ocorten-212-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
February 11, 2010

When we set out to convince PTC to support WF4 with Intralink 3.x the
main problem was the unicode 16-bit support.
PTC told us that this would require a major overhaul of the Intralink
code and thus cost a lot of resources.
But still the Pro/E community proved to be big enough and PTC decided to
support WF4 and overhaul the Intralink code.
Maybe it does not take that much resources to support WF5 on Intralink
3.x now that the unicode issue has allready been solved.
Perhaps it's time for PTC to chime in on this issue?

But here at Fico we are currently biting the bullet: we are migrating
towards Windchill Intralink 9.1.
Many years ago I did the Pro/PDM->Pro/Intralink migration myself. But
now we have to hire a company to help us out with migrating and merging
two databases (costs us $100K incl. training)
Assuming we are able to swallow the bullet: Intralink 9.1 will give us
many advantages; most importantly the improved WAN performance which
enables us to operate more efficient on a global scale. And off course
being able to upgrade ProE and being on supported technology again.



Olaf Corten
CAD/PLM Manager, Besi Competence Center - Other Business Applications
Fico BV, Ratio 6, 6921 RW Duiven, The Netherlands
Tel.: +31 26 3196215
Translate
ChrisCollinson12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
February 11, 2010
Mike is right about PDMlink, it is a more far reaching tool than Intralink,
I have design team around the world and Windchill has made it far more
successful than Intralink, I have project teams using ProjectLink to
collaborate around the world to, So it is a good tool in my book.

I had a conversation with the Northern Europe VP about this upgrade and the
cost and as he said, it is not just a CAD Data Management tool it is a PDM
system,

It is worth looking at what other value you "Could" potentially get from it
rather than just CAD Data Management, change management, doc management and
so on. Some might say a sledge hammer to crack a walnut, by why not turn
the walnut into a tree?

My comments were against the complexity of the install of Windchill and the
risk to the business if you attempted yourself and it went south.
Although ootb it is very easy to get a new system up and running the danger
and complexity is when upgraded an existing system with Databases upgrades,
Ldaps etc where as Intralink and ProPDM were easy monolithic systems.

Sorry for the rant but tis a good debate


Best Regards

Chris Collinson
CAD Administrator
skype_id - dek_ccollinson


Translate
ChrisCollinson12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
February 11, 2010
Sorry I meant to say Rex was right

Best Regards

Chris Collinson
CAD Administrator
Translate
Spikaart1-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 11, 2010

Maintenance does include new software upgrades. When PTC kills a software and forces everyone to switch to a new software after paying maintenance on the one they had it just tastes bad. "New"software that replaces the originalshould be included in maintenance and should not reduce functionality.

Killing Intralink did leave customers hanging (us included).

PTC's new solutions do lack some functionality (some of which are critical to our business) and do increase costs (not a smart thing to do right now).

PTC would do well to stop backpedaling, do a complete about-face, support their Ilink3.x customers on Wildfire 5, and create a clear migration path that does not reduce capabilities while increasing costs. If they did that we would start back on maintenance.

PTC makes great software! The problem is that they left many companies in a bad lurch with this Intralink debacle. Backpedaling is the wrong strategy but so is leaving many companies hung out to dry. They need to fix this problem once and for all. And while they work on that they should be supporting Intralink3.x customers so they are able to leverage Wildfire5.

Steve Pikaart

Continental Tooling Concepts

Translate
lhunter1-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 12, 2010
Well said Steve. Continental is not the only one hung out to dry.



On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Steve Pikaart <
spikaart@continentaltooling.com> wrote:

> Maintenance does include new software upgrades. When PTC kills a software
> and forces everyone to switch to a new software after paying maintenance on
> the one they had it just tastes bad. "New" software that replaces the
> original should be included in maintenance and should not reduce
> functionality.
> Killing Intralink did leave customers hanging (us included).
>
> PTC's new solutions do lack some functionality (some of which are critical
> to our business) and do increase costs (not a smart thing to do right now).
> PTC would do well to stop backpedaling, do a complete about-face, support
> their Ilink3.x customers on Wildfire 5, and create a clear migration path
> that does not reduce capabilities while increasing costs. If they did that
> we would start back on maintenance.
>
> PTC makes great software! The problem is that they left many companies in a
> bad lurch with this Intralink debacle. Backpedaling is the wrong strategy
> but so is leaving many companies hung out to dry. They need to fix this
> problem once and for all. And while they work on that they should be
> supporting Intralink3.x customers so they are able to leverage Wildfire5.
>
> Steve Pikaart
>
> Continental Tooling Concepts
>
>
>
Translate
ptc-1699471-Visitor
1-Visitor
October 1, 2010
Hi all,

We're planing to move from 3.x to PDMLink, and we'll only use it the same way we used 3.x. As a data repository with revision control, release levels and approvals in place. Because we have active and legacy data in both PrioE and SW, there is an argument for migrating to SolidWorks Enterprise rather then PDMLink. I saw Enterprise very briefly and thought the interface was simple and easy to use, although that was only on the surface. Didn't have time to get into details. Both can manage the other's native files, and the seat licenses are floating too. I personally would rather stick with PDMLink (since we already own some seats), but one of our sites also owns (fewer seats) of Enterprise. Does anyone have any experience with Enterprise? Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Stefan
Translate
Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement