when is Creo 4.0 expected?

[rohit_rajan]

when is Creo 4.0 expected?

[dgschaefer]

I agree. For those who pay maintenance, you get no new software and limited new functionality for two full years of maintenance payments.  Ridiculous.

New releases should come yearly, in my view, we pay maintenance yearly.  Well, some do, we've decided it's not worht it and only pay every 3rd year or more, specifically because of this issue.

If you agree, please vote for my suggestion for PTC to return to annual product releases.

As I said in the comments there, it is rather ironic that PTC sells software to help customers manage projects better and get them to market sooner, but their own products are taking longer and longer to get to market.

[magnus.salomons]

I've read interviews where PTC stated that they would get back to annual releases. It was in fact a promise from the Creo launch that they would focus on CAD and have annual releases. Sad that it's going in the other direction.

So they will have PDMLink 11.0 at the next PTC World but no upgrade of Creo. I wonder if it's the first time ever with two PTC World events in a row without a new release of ProE or Creo.

[dgschaefer]

I'm glad someone else remembers that.  I tried in vain to find it online anywhere and couldn't, but I distinctly recall them saying that with Creo they were committed to returning to annual releases.

[msteffke]

Yuk,  I certainly don't want to upgrade and do a rollout every year, and have to verify that nothing was broken in the "upgrade" and redo all or our training documentation.  Our engineers are here to design product and generate production deliverables.  Not test software and document it.    I also have a feeling in a years time all they would do is move menu and picks around to generate some feeling of value.   Nothing irks me more than moving command picks and re-arranging icons but in the end its the exact same functionality.    I guess I'm that guy that still wants the cars bright switch on the floor.   It was perfect.  You stomped your idle foot on it.  Today I have 4 vehicles.  Some you push fwd, some you pull back, and as I sit here I can't tell you which one does which.   Sometimes your hand slips and it triggers the blinkers.  Just an example of Just because an idea is new, does't always mean its better.  Its just better in someone's opinion. 

[DeanLong]

Not only the issue of lagging releases for users but also for the VAR organizations as well. How in the world can a VAR make money reselling software that is 2 years old for FULL PRICE + Maintenance and struggle to provide training when YouTube is free? The whole business model is faulty.

[rohit_rajan]

just to mention..though solidworks comes out with a new release every year, they also put up very less new or improved functionality, many a times those functionalities are already present in Creo/ProE.

I am not supporting this extremely late release of Creo 4.0 in anyway.

there has been no significant change in functionalities in solidworks from solidworks 2010 till solidworks 2015..the only one being is the "flatten surface" which is also available to solidworks premium users only.

[dgschaefer]

Fair enough point, but when I have to justify my maintenance expense to my business office, big updates every couple of years vs small updates each year don't matter.  They hear no updates this year, what are we paying for?

[Dale_Rosema]

Aren't M codes "small" updates now and throughout the year?

[dgschaefer]

Yes, but until recently, they were simply bug fixes, not additional functionality.  Starting in Creo, PTC has been introducing new functionality in the maintenance build releases.  In my view, this makes more of a maintenance headache for admins as it's less clear what functionality is available.  You have to have maintenance to see the KB article that shows what new functionality is in what build. Also, it is more critical to make sure everyone is on the same build so they all have the same functionality.  For us, we might build something in a newer build of the same release and send it to a client on an older build and they don't have the functionality that we used.

I prefer the old system of new functionality in new versions, bug fixes in maintenance releases.  It's easier to manage.  But, it does mean that you might get some new stuff in between releases.

[rohit_rajan]

PTC tying itself in knots!

[rohit_rajan]

now we have new functionality and old plus new bugs!

did that increase the total bugs...with very less new functionality and verrrryyyyyy long wait! 

[LawrenceS]

I have heard the argument where people want less major releases, in order for them to be really major.  There is a good point here, though I am not sure if it would be like that in reality.  As for the licensing I started the product idea voicing that maintenance dollars should be toward...well...maintenance.  If we want a new version I think we should buy it, which would mean that PTC needs to earn our business.

Change Maintenance & Licensing model to better stimulate innovation

[David_M]

Dean, why shouldn't it be full price? It's the most full-featured version of Pro/E ever and it is entirely up to date. Not only that but several new features have been added since Creo 3 launched.

Overlooking the inconsistencies in the UI, it's a really great piece of software.

[DeanLong]

Well, David for a lot of reasons posted earlier in this thread. Like....

1. Yearly maintenance due without "yearly" enhancements. If I am paying for something, give me something in return. You may say I get PTC "support" for my money. However, I think the last time I called 1-800-4Pro-Hel was in 2012 for a what turned out to be a corrupted file that I could (and should) have remodeled in the first place. I would have been faster than how long it took to get the issue "resolved". Then the second to last "support" call I made was in 1998. That should give a good clue how well my maintenance dollars were working for me.

2. Basically since Creo hit the market (was it 2010-ish) essentially what has happened with is a GUI re-shuffle....like Wildfire before it....that actually slowed users down until they could get "up to speed" again. I have been on this software since 1988 and, well let's say not much has changed in 30 years.

3. PITA issues STILL remain after many great enhancement suggestions I have been witness to go essentially untouched. Tables are still as PITA. Reps are still a PITA. BOM creation is still a PITA. BOM Balloons are still a PITA. Config files are still a PITA. (Sorry @dougschaefer...I still think they are a PITA!) There have been issues that we have asked for over many years that PTC simply didn't have the time nor resources to address. First it was Windchill that sucked up the efforts. Now it's IoT. (I am sick of hearing this at every turn). Essentially, MCAD was not a focus for a very long time. The competition took full advantage of this.

4. The issue that started this exchange. VARS were hung out to dry 10years ago and really do not have a viable and sustainable business model. This may be a rhetorical question but, does PTC really think a VAR can make money selling software when even they aren't doing it themselves? How can a VAR convince Company "X" to upgrade from CREO2 to Creo3 when there is no real difference? Or does PTC think a VAR can make money on training when YouTube is full of free training videos? Most VARS have to sell all the software now, not just PTC stuff to stay viable.

So I am not disagreeing that Creo functions fine, that isn't the issue. The issue is "What are people getting for their maintenance dollars 2+years after the code was released"?

[David_M]

I agree that there is no need for the customer to pay maintenance unless the customer is getting enhancements in each new version. I think large businesses will pay maintenance regardless, but smaller business may choose not to. As I understand it, PTC recently revised their policy so that full back-maintenance is now due before a customer can resume a maintenance agreement that they have taken leave from. It seems like this policy would benefit VARs, but I don't think it will be long-lived.

I also agree that there is not much difference between Creo 2 and 3. Despite all the hype and marketing around Creo 3, I think Creo 2 was the most recent must-have release. Creo 2 is also a more stable product.

Out of curiosity, is there a requirement for customers to use VARs in the United States?

[DeanLong]

David,

Apologies for not responding. I believe the install base "size" plan still determines whether or not you must buy from a VAR. If I am incorrect, I am sure my Pro/E brethren will correct me.

[LawrenceS]

Dean Long‌, the real question to me is what does maintenance have to do with new releases and new features?  What are new features maintaining?

( Change Maintenance & Licensing model to better stimulate innovation )

As a larger company far as actual maintenance goes, we find New Builds and the ability to open calls for PTC to fix problems and include the fixes in future versions very valuable.

It would be nice to see what percentage much of our "maintenance" dollars actually goes to true R&D (not cases, not Builds, but new features and new capabilities) for Creo.  As Dean Long‌ mentioned there is huge opportunities in Creo that haven't even been touched in decades!  With Creo I know that they did add some really good capabilities (that we do use every day), and would definitely like to see more of it, and more of it in proportion to what we are paying for it!

[DeanLong]

Lawrence,

You my friend have hit on the million dollar questions! Where and to what does the mighty maintenance dollar go toward?

My $.02...

Recently (I.E. last ten years) maintenance money has been unevenly split between functionality/software upgrades vs. acquisitions of "other" software companies (I.E. Stock holders), WindChill assault development (I.E pushing it like crack dealer), copying SW functions, marketing hype (I.E. keeping us all waiting for the next release like an ugly date on Prom night) and now...all things IoT. In other words, I think most of the money that PTC get's from the user base goes for making PTC NOT an MCAD company. Which would be fine if they would just come out and say that. In all fairness, I have not been to a conference for some time so they may be serving Kool-Aide in one of the suites.

[TomU]

Can you imagine how different Creo would look today if ALL the money spent on Creo maintenance could only be used to improve and develop Creo?

Attending PTC Live Global last June, the statement was made that PTC had spent over $500 million during the previous 12 months to acquire and develop IOT capabilities.  Instantly I wondered how many bugs that amount of money could have fixed in Creo. 

[dgschaefer]

Dean Long wrote:

...  Config files are still a PITA. (Sorry @dougschaefer...I still think they are a PITA!) ...

You won't find me argue that they aren't a PITA, but they are very powerful.  So far, PTC's attempts in Creo to make them less of a PITA hasn't ruined their power, thankfully, but they also haven't made them any easier.  Frankly, they've done the opposite.

You and I are on the same page as far as value for the dollar.  I do believe that there have been significant enhancements over the years (edit references in Creo 3 is a good example. A powerful tool made easier to use and more powerful), but there still are UX issues, some large and many small.

[BobSchwerdlin]

Just a few things that have bugged me for YEARS and YEARS...

Model tree columns still cannot be saved.

Bolt hole editing table (archaic at best).

I remember when PTC started down the Windchill path.  It seemed like that was all the company was interested in.  MCAD, Pro/E was a distant memory.

[dschenken]

You may be interested to look at what happened to the Windchill company co-founder after PTC bought it. Windchill (software) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With tough competition and uncertain rewards, it makes sense that the company would look to move into other areas.

[BenLoosli]

Windchill was only purchased by PTC because of the investment that Computervision had made in WT, Inc. When PTC bought CV, they also bought part ownership of WTI I have heard that PTC wasn't even aware that they owned part of WTI, until a few months after the purchase.

[TomU]

Steve Walske described Windchill as "a diamond in the rough." Prior to completion of the acquisition, Jim Heppleman visited PTC and described to Harrison and others Windchill’s development strategy. They became intrigued with the ideas Heppleman was proposing and subsequently bought the portion of the company not owned by Computervision from Windchill’s founders and employees and it became a subsidiary of PTC. Walske’s reaction was “its better to be lucky than smart.”

http://www.cadhistory.net/16%20Parametric%20Technology.pdf

If you're bored sometime, the entire article is a pretty fascinating read.  The acquisition of Computervision and Windchill is discussed starting on page 29.

[mganzer]

You heard right...

[BillRyan]

Have the VAR's branched out to other Creo software like Creo View...that team seems to be making significant software changes and upgrades every 6 months. Creo View 3.1 is out now.  I don't see much training on Youtube for it.

[ljin-2]

I expect the following enhancements

• Mini toolbar
• Support Full Screen mode
• Add flexible modeling extension into sheetmetal mode
• Update standard for geometric tolerance
• Update standard for surface finish symbol
• Add GD & T Advisor as one extension
• Add Keyshot as one extension

[agoksu-2]

If you want to test beta version;

PTC Creo 4.0 Pre-Beta User Experience (UX) Testing | PTC

fill-in form after that you will receive an e-mail to login to remote test environment Creo 4.0.

[Chris3]

According to the Product Calendar it is now Nov 2016