cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

ProductPoint

Amethyst

ProductPoint

When I first read the post here on ProductPoint retiring my first reaction was this was just someone mis-informed or starting a joke/rumor.


However, I now see that this is true.


My reaction now, WTF?
I was told just two weeks agowhile at PTC that development on ProductPoint is continuing to move forward.


Not even 2 years on the market, with the big push of being the solution for SMB as a Data Management option if they did not already have something, and ALREADY it is being retired?


I personally was interested in ProductPoint as possibly being a solution for getting off INTRALINK 3.4, and I am real glad that I did not jump the gun and switch earlier.


The announcement stated "


Who made the determination that I, and many of the customers, require a broader and deeper capability? Sorry, but NO ONE ASKED ME what I needed and/or wanted. Fact of the matter is, ProductPoint WAS ON THE TOP OF MY LIST of possible solutions for replacing ILINK 3, especially with the enhancements added in 2.0.


PTC, I DO NOT NEED OR WANT PDMLink, and honestly really do not want anything to do with Windchill in general.
I NEED AND WANT A CADD DATA MANAGEMENT TOOL. THAT IS IT!
I do not need or want all the (B.S.) bells and whistles that Windchill offers.


Sure this may be a good thing for large companies with 100 or 1000's of users, and if I was still working for a large company I too may consider Windchill offerings. However, I am not with that type company anymore.
I have a small user base, I am with a small company where my job is DESIGN and CADD & DATA MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
There is no way that I can justify the price and/or time required for a Windchill product.


Windchill 10? Nope. Not going to happen.
Recently I have been so busy that migration keeps getting pushed back, and now more than I ever I am grateful for that cause most likely I would switched to ProductPoint, and I probally have to be justifying my job to management now.


I tell ya, WF3 and ILINK 3.4 are running great right now, even if they are not support anymore, and with this recent announcement I am now considering stopping the maintenance renewals since migration for me has just been pushed back even more (no sense in paying for something that is no longer supported and no viable options of moving forward).

9 REPLIES 9

ProductPoint

Ditto Joel...



There definitely seems to be a gap in CAD data management for the 1-10
user companies. We can simply not justify the cost of the large scale
solutions.



I to had thought ProductPoint might actually finally be that solution.



T


ProductPoint

<cynic hat=" on=">
But ProductPoint doesn't fit into the income bracket that PTC wants from their products. Windchill is Heppelmann's baby and must be protected.
<cynic hat=" off=">

If I had that 1-10 user company using Wildfire, ProductPoint would be at the top of my list, too. Having managed Intralink 3.x and Windchill systems, there is a world of difference in the complexity of Windchill for just CAD vaulting. Add in the other things, change management for one, that PDMLink can do and management wants to utilize the full power they paid for. Intralink 8+ is still Windchill-based and has the same hardware requirements of PDMLink, so no savings there.

The ProductPoint death announcement said only PDMLink was the upgrade. Intralink would be a little better for those companies that only need CAD vaulting. Is Intralink 10 a PTC approved upgrade from ProductPoint?

Thank you,

Ben H. Loosli
USEC, INC.

ProductPoint

ILINK 9 had been a consideration for me as well. I mean really all it is, is a watered down version of PDMLink.
However, I never really had faith in the past that the product would last, and even more so now.
That is why I had faith in ProductPoint, cause it was the new kid on the block, and it was partnered with Microsoft.

ProductPoint

All in all this announcement just confirms to me that PTC saw the product
point solution as being a threat to the Windchill product. A PTC product
line manager just gave our usergroup a fantastic demonstration of the
product along with insight into what could have been coming in the release 2
and 3 of the product. (on March 10th) In short the 40+ users in attendance
saw great value in the product and many people, me included, thought this
would be a great way to move into WF5 and a PDM solution without having to
go to Winchill PDMlink or INTRALINK X.X. I noticed in
there announcement that there was no mention of INTRALINK only Windchill
PDMlink. Either way I see this a major blunder by PTC. There is to large
of a market out there to ignore the CAD only data management. In my opinion
I believe there are many companies out there using nothing that
would benefit from something simple. Just the ability to be able to use
standard components across multiple projects and only have to keep rev
control of one item.

For those of you with a small installation 1-10 users I would strongly
suggest a great little FREE pdm package called GO-PDM you can find more
info about it here

ProductPoint

Ron,



The important point missed by PTC is that they are NOT threatening the
Windchill product at these small 1-10 customer businesses. We will
never be able to afford Windchill so at this point we will only look
elsewhere for a solution.



T


ProductPoint

I agree and indicated this in my closing comment on the original thread.
Will this sort of licensing and direction from PTC also have an effect on
users considering direct modeling in addition to their parametric (or vice
versa)?



My comments from yesterday:

"When you renew your maintenance agreement for your upgraded Windchill
PDMLink licenses, you will be quoted a new price that reflects the Windchill
PDMLink maintenance price that is current at that time." - PTC



In my opinion this is where PTC continues to miss opportunities to surprise
and delight customers. Customers, especially SMB's, wishing to stay with
the PTC product suite will be asked to pay more. While some can argue,
rightfully in my view, that the PDMLink solution is a better solution the
cost of ownership and ROI are difficult to get across in any organization.



Similarly do not expect for PTC to offer to Pro/E customers "Flexible
Modeling/Direct" without having to pay for the additional app/module. This
despite PTC currently leveraging maintenance dollars from CoCreate customers
for that development.



For example:

PTC has two customers it is getting maintenance dollars from

1. One using Creo Elements Parametric (Pro/E)

2. One using Creo Elements Direct (CoCreate)



Under the improved Creo platform PTC shall have a better combined data model
to build upon with the same maintenance dollars. This should improve their
ability to develop enhancements and improve usability under this common data
model and platform. This should actually lower PTC's development cost or
allow them to make further enhancements with the same dollars. Yet we
should expect:

1. One using Creo + Parametric [+ additional cost for direct]

2. One using Creo + Direct [+ additional cost for parametric]

Under this scenario PTC will be getting their traditional maintenance
dollars from the Parametric and Direct customers plus additional dollars for
companies wishing have the additional enhancements under the Creo platform.
Cost of ownership will go up under this scenario.



This certainly make packages that offer combined PDM/PLM/Parametric/Direct
more attractive.



I have been a long time user of PTC products and encourage them to look deep
into this. Poor customer perception is something that can be overcome with
surprising and delighting existing customers. As for new customers it all
about ROI and ongoing cost of ownership, period.



Let's hope my scenario is wrong and PTC shocks the industry with unparallel
function, usability, and ROI/Cost of ownership.





Tim McLellan
Mobius Innovation and Development, Inc.

RE: ProductPoint

Our Traction division was using BlueStar:


http://www.pdmtechnologygroup.com/files/BlueStar_Brochure_rev3.pdf

In Reply to Joel Nelson:



When I first read the post here on ProductPoint retiring my first reaction was this was just someone mis-informed or starting a joke/rumor.


However, I now see that this is true.


My reaction now, WTF?
I was told just two weeks agowhile at PTC that development on ProductPoint is continuing to move forward.


Not even 2 years on the market, with the big push of being the solution for SMB as a Data Management option if they did not already have something, and ALREADY it is being retired?


I personally was interested in ProductPoint as possibly being a solution for getting off INTRALINK 3.4, and I am real glad that I did not jump the gun and switch earlier.


The announcement stated "


Who made the determination that I, and many of the customers, require a broader and deeper capability? Sorry, but NO ONE ASKED ME what I needed and/or wanted. Fact of the matter is, ProductPoint WAS ON THE TOP OF MY LIST of possible solutions for replacing ILINK 3, especially with the enhancements added in 2.0.


PTC, I DO NOT NEED OR WANT PDMLink, and honestly really do not want anything to do with Windchill in general.
I NEED AND WANT A CADD DATA MANAGEMENT TOOL. THAT IS IT!
I do not need or want all the (B.S.) bells and whistles that Windchill offers.


Sure this may be a good thing for large companies with 100 or 1000's of users, and if I was still working for a large company I too may consider Windchill offerings. However, I am not with that type company anymore.
I have a small user base, I am with a small company where my job is DESIGN and CADD & DATA MANAGEMENT SUPPORT.
There is no way that I can justify the price and/or time required for a Windchill product.


Windchill 10? Nope. Not going to happen.
Recently I have been so busy that migration keeps getting pushed back, and now more than I ever I am grateful for that cause most likely I would switched to ProductPoint, and I probally have to be justifying my job to management now.


I tell ya, WF3 and ILINK 3.4 are running great right now, even if they are not support anymore, and with this recent announcement I am now considering stopping the maintenance renewals since migration for me has just been pushed back even more (no sense in paying for something that is no longer supported and no viable options of moving forward).






RE: ProductPoint

I really don't know what to say or think anymore.


I started with an Intralink 8.X implementation that went horribly wrong. It was too complext to install, maintain and deploy. I was then introduced to ProductPoint. I paid to switch all my licenses over to ProductPoint and though it would fit our need perfectly. I started the implementation process only to find that ProdutPoint 1.1 was not compatible with Sharepoint 2010 which my company runs.


Now I have to wait for ProductPoint 2.0 to FINALLY implement PDM at our company. Now I find that ProductPoint 2.0 is retired and I am back to were I started. I have been trying to implmenet a PTC PDM solution for the last 4 years with no success.



GRRRRRRRR.....



"Too many people walk around like Clark Kent, because they don't realize they can Fly like Superman"

RE: ProductPoint

I see the threat coming from the large companies that would see value in migrating to productpoint.


It could happen. There is always the large company that doesn't have the need for a large, bloated data management system.




In Reply to Anthony DelNegro, P.E.:



Ron,



The important point missed by PTC is that they are NOT threatening the
Windchill product at these small 1-10 customer businesses. We will
never be able to afford Windchill so at this point we will only look
elsewhere for a solution.



T



Announcements