Companies moving to WF 5

[teslacad]

Does anyone have any info on which companies are moving to WF 5?

TIA

[mlocascio]

Now that would be a very interesting document or finding.



Michael P. Locascio

[ptc-113113]

We are,


in 2011

(sorry its almost Friday)
Andrew

[mlocascio]

So that must have been a pun of some sort. I worked for a company like that.
They are probably STILL on Wildfire II.



Michael P. Locascio

[ptc-113113]

hey!
we don't take FOREVER, we just don't want the first set of bugs!

[StephenW]

There are a LOT of variables that drive when a company upgrades.
In my experience, smaller companies usually upgrade quicker since they typically don't have as much customization and integration. Larger companies tend to take longer due primarily to the customization and integration.
Other obvious reasons are Pro/PDM (not really, I don't think anyone is still using it, maybe, yikes), Intralink compatibility, and PDMLink compatibility. Testing is another good reason, to verifiy that the stuff you do is not adversely affected by the upgrade. Can you imagine a large company upgrading a 1000 users and THEN discovering something doesn't work...what a nightmare.

Time...a lot of companies don't have dedicated CAD Admins. They use an engineer or designer who has other responsibilities.

Customer...If you do stuff or someone else, you can't move until they tell you to. And then if you have multiple customers, you typically have multiple releases running at any given time.

Bugs...Like Andrew said, no one wants to be the guinea pig

We are still on WF 2. They are planning on going to WF 4 some time, but they are also planning on moving away from Intralink to TeamCenter so upgrading is really out of the question until they figure out the compatibility issues. Once at WF 4, we will NOT move again until TeamCenter is compatible with whatever release. It works for use because we are the end user. We have no customers (other than internal) using our CAD data. No one is driving us to upgrade except corporate pushing for us to use TeamCenter.

Tons of reasons for not upgrading.

[DamianCastillo]

Testing is important for any company, but I do agree that the larger companies take longer and for good reason.

I usually test for about 1 month and jump on. I figured that someone has to actually use it or it will never get the first build upgraded. 🙂

As long as I can prove that no MAJOR issues exist, I jump to the new version very quickly. The other factor is any new changes to the GUI that require training. This will delay the install because I must first teach my users what has changed. In WF5 the Drawing GUI is completely different and will require some level of training on my part.

Not sure how long it will take me to move over to WF5, but I will keep you guys posted.

[mlocascio]

The last company that I worked for is probably still on Wildfire II. They
were dragging their feet just a little too much. It will probably be eons
before their users get anywhere up-to-date on Pro/E Wildfire.



Michael P. Locascio

[ptc-1932745]

What's amusing is going to user group events and having the PTC rep ask
for a show of hands for which version the audience was using.



About 6 months to a year ago(?), out of 100 or so users represented from
maybe 20-30 companies, most were WF2, and only a handful (one or two
companies were on WF4).



Hopefully, in WF 5, pro-Man will be fully up-to-date.



(I'm still trying to get the machinability database working)



As I remember, one main issue was I-Link 3.3-3.4 update and various WF
updates not playing well together that caused the delay.





Christopher Gosnell

TRIGON INC.
FPD Company
124 Hidden Valley Road
McMurray, PA 15317
PH: 724.941.5540
FX: 724.941.8322
www.fpdinc.com

[pgress]

Chris Gosnell wrote:
>
> What’s amusing is going to user group events and having the PTC rep
> ask for a show of hands for which version the audience was using.
>
> About 6 months to a year ago(?), out of 100 or so users represented
> from maybe 20-30 companies, most were WF2, and only a handful (one or
> two companies were on WF4).
>


In my opinion, this is because of PTC's refusal to save to a standard
format, where WF2 can open a WF4 or WF5 file. Thats what always delays
me upgrading, if I save in WF4 and my customer has WF2, I'm in trouble.
It's not to hard to allow a redefine if there's a problem opening a WF4
file in WF2.

So this is my gripe/rant (sorry, I know it's not Friday). It is also my
belief, that when designing software, you have the Frontend (GUI) and
the Backend (engine). The frontend changes for productivity, but the
backend saves the data. PTC can't keep changing the backend extensively.
The backend only saves what the unit looks like, not how you got there.
Yes I know it's parametric, so there are some changes when saving
individual features, this is what redefine is about if something got lost.

Back way in the past, before PTC went to Wildfire, the files were text
files, not a compressed file with a password key (this is how they stop
older versions opening up a file or a competitor), I would just change
the header in the file to the version of Pro-E I needed to open and it
would just work. You cant do that any more.



Paul

[JonathanHodgson]

In fairness to PTC, some of this is due to new features.

Multi-set rounds, to take a trivial example, are a nice feature to be
able to use in WF3 - but Pro/E 2001 wouldn't understand them. These,
and also more major stuff like the WF interchangable
cut/protrusion/surface features, are cases where the back-end has been
significantly changed to enable front-end improvements.

Regards,
Jonathan

[kwsauter]

Yes, but it wouldn't be that hard to be able to 'save as' to an earlier
version that would split those multi-set rounds into features that the
older version would understand. The same could be done with other
featues, excepting those like warp that don't have a corresponding
feature in earlier versions. I would be OK with that particular feature
being a solid chunk that I could deal with later. The ability to edit
newer files in older versions would be an enormous productivity gain for
us, and it might even make people more willing to upgrade to newer
versions. It's the corporate insistence on @#$!! Profit that makes them
force us to newer versions and cuts down our productivity. If they
would concentrate more on making us more productive than making more
profit, they'd very likely make more profit, but I don't think that kind
of thinking will ever win out at PTC.


Ken Sauter
DRS Reconnaissance Surveillance and Target Acquisition
Infrared Technologies Division
PO Box 740188
Dallas, TX 75374
469-221-5430
-

[pgress]

Hodgson, Jonathan P wrote:
> In fairness to PTC, some of this is due to new features.
>
> Multi-set rounds, to take a trivial example, are a nice feature to be
> able to use in WF3 - but Pro/E 2001 wouldn't understand them. These,
> and also more major stuff like the WF interchangable
> cut/protrusion/surface features, are cases where the back-end has been
> significantly changed to enable front-end improvements.
>
>

Yes I agree, but it doesn't take the fact away they could let it go to
the typical "redefine" if it can't handle it. They also could, in "save
as" include earlier Wildfire versions with the disclaimer not all
features may save properly.

Paul

[eslotty]

(humble opinion alert)

Accounting for backwards compatability almost always results in a
compromised design.... It's not to say it can't be done- and may even
result in some cleverness, and happy customers, howvever, the design is
still ultimately compromised. Software, mechanical, electrical, it
doesn't matter.

When we purchased Pro/E we all knew there was no looking back... And how
refreshing is that! Nobody makes us move to the next version. Forward
compatible- yes... Backwards- oh well.... Why carry old baggage---
wasn't that the yoke around the neck of the other CAD players?

I think what bugs the rank'n'file the most are a) the initial release
bugs and b) the ever changing GUI... How often have we stared at the
screen thinking "Wow.... Now why did they do THAT?"

As for Granite--- business is business... A squeaky wheel got greased
somewhere.... Or a marketing geek was looking over the shoulder of a
programmer one day "hmmmm what is that?!?!"........

Long live Wildfire ummmm.. 9!

(end alert)

Have a great week!

GE Healthcare Technologies
Clinical Systems
Monitoring Solutions
Eric R. Slotty
Mechanical Designer
8200 W. Tower Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53223

[pgress]

Your right, there's nothing that can be done (other then voice it), move
forward.

Back to the original point, my opinion was backwards compatibility was a
factor in preventing migration to WF(whatever). I know I'll try WF5
when it's first is released, but not sure I'll use it as the default
design platform. At least not until more companies start using it. I'm
a very small custom design company and do design work for larger
companies, I need to be compatible with their Wildfire versions. I have
to keep WF2, WF3, WF4 and soon WF5, just to remain compatible.

Yes Granite helps, but it's not the same as if "let me design in WF5,
and if I need it in WF2, let me export it and take my lumps to redefine
it to work".



Paul



Slotty, Eric (GE Healthcare) wrote:
> (humble opinion alert)
>
> Accounting for backwards compatability almost always results in a
> compromised design.... It's not to say it can't be done- and may even
> result in some cleverness, and happy customers, howvever, the design is
> still ultimately compromised. Software, mechanical, electrical, it
> doesn't matter.
>
> When we purchased Pro/E we all knew there was no looking back... And how
> refreshing is that! Nobody makes us move to the next version. Forward
> compatible- yes... Backwards- oh well.... Why carry old baggage---
> wasn't that the yoke around the neck of the other CAD players?
>
> I think what bugs the rank'n'file the most are a) the initial release
> bugs and b) the ever changing GUI... How often have we stared at the
> screen thinking "Wow.... Now why did they do THAT?"
>
> As for Granite--- business is business... A squeaky wheel got greased
> somewhere.... Or a marketing geek was looking over the shoulder of a
> programmer one day "hmmmm what is that?!?!"........
>
>


--

Paul Gress
President
Rad Electronics Inc.
3122 Expressway Drive South
Islandia, NY 11749
(631) 243-7707
(631) 243-7708 Fax
www.rad-electronics.com

[kwsauter]

If you're one company and everyone is on the same page, that works fine.
What if you're a consultant and you have customers running three
different versions? It means bloating your machine with three different
versions of Proe, dealing with compatibility and licensing issues
between versions on that machine, or maybe having a completely different
machine for each version, all costing money, time, aggravation, etc.
Sure, it can be dealt with, because we have to deal with it, but
everyone I deal with isn't going to upgrade just because I don't have
their version, or they don't have mine. You have to realize that
maintenance and upgrades with PTC don't come cheap, and forcing a
customer to upgrade, or forcing me to upgrade, is not a light decision.
It is much simpler to be able to open and work with a file that is one
or two versions ahead, or behind, of your own. Just two versions back
would be enough. It would mean the upgrade decision could be based
purely on functionality and benefit to you as a company, rather than
being forced to deal with something because PTC wants more money from
you. I have to give PTC credit for the ability to open WF3 files in
WF2. That is much needed, and that functionality is used. Will they
continue to offer that in later versions, like WF4 and WF5? I hope so.


Ken Sauter
DRS Reconnaissance Surveillance and Target Acquisition
Infrared Technologies Division
PO Box 740188
Dallas, TX 75374
469-221-5430
-

[ptc-171472]

I'm with Andrew!

We tend to watch a couple large companies who make things like cars,
planes and/or satellites. (no names, wink, wink)

When they feel it's safe to upgrade, then we follow suit. We don't have
10 to 100 users to test a new system



I still get grief because we didn't jump onto WF 1.0 for 18 months, even
though I keep reminding them of a family table bug that would have
brought us to our knees, which was resolved in WF 2.0



When a new version comes out, I start skimming the user groups for
grumbling, rumbling or praise and start my evaluation there. If the big
guys are running it, and the boards aren't burning with warnings and
complaints, we'll start planning our upgrade.



We were on 2000i when I started seven years ago, we've upgraded to
2001, WF 2.0, WF 3.0 and are currently running WF 4.0 M080 planning a
required upgrade to 4.0 M090 to support PDMLink 9.1 For all the grief
I've gotten, I was reminded that we were on 2000i for years before I
became admin. I've always got guys who want to be on the latest and
greatest by midnight of a new release!!!



Black & Decker Hardware & Home Improvement
Michelle McMasters
Engineering Systems Administratormichelle.mcmasters@bdhhi.com
Demonstrate Unyielding Integrity * Deliver on Commitments * Inspire
Excellence * Win through Teamwork

IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain
information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you

[cpodom]

Yeah midnight!!

I want the latest and greatest now! If PTC releases it then it must be
perfect.



Curtis

[ptc-46674]

These are the same users who will complain when they find something that doesn't function in the new release, and go on & on about how bad PTC is and how great some other cadd program is....

As an administrator you haft to do your due diligence, whatever that means to you! if that means you wait a few months, then you wait a few months! look at post such as this one for complaints & issues that others have experienced. Install it locally on your machine & test test test! look for new date codes that resolve the issues etc... & test test test!

The cadd user doesn't make the decision of when or if you update to a new release!

You need to be able to listen to users & ignore them too a certain extent at the same time! they often don't look at the whole picture or think of all the what if's...

Remember you can't go back to a previous release once you make the move and start modifying & checking files into your data base.

Dave McClinton
McKesson
MCAD System Administrator