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

Question regarding Windchill F000 releases


Question regarding Windchill F000 releases

Hi All,

I have a general question regarding the use of F000 releases of Windchill.
My background has been in the Pro/E area, where typically F000 releases
were avoided.

Having moved over to the Windchill side, I am curious about how Windchill
F000 releases are regarded. Do folks typically Go-Live on F000? Or is it
customary to wait for a maintenance release or two? I pulled the STR list
for 10.0. From what I can tell the greatest number of STRs were reported
in between M010 and M020. I'm guessing that means that most companies
waited until M010 to go live.

Horror or Success stories will be accepted. I will be glad to post a



Question regarding Windchill F000 releases

I take them with the same attitude.
F000 releases are for you to play around with and see what has changed.
M020 is a safe bet for migrating from the prior release to.

With Wildfire, I would hold off until m050 or higher, if I could.
Any build after m180 is usually good to go with no formal testing.

Now PTC has added the .1 releases to the mix, so that just complicates things a little more.
Windchill 10.1 will be out in the second quarter of the year.
A new build upgrade takes less planning and testing than a new release upgrade.
10.1 will be considered a new release and need the additional testing.

Thank you,

Ben H. Loosli

RE: Question regarding Windchill F000 releases

Hi Ben,

Hopefully, no one just goes live with anything. If you "go-live' with anything without evaluation, it won't matter how many builds you wait for, it won't beto your liking. Typically a build is put into test and when it passes all the requirements, it's rolled out into production for all to use. (We all know this right?)

From my perspective the real question is, "Is it worth my time to test F000 or is it better to wait for a few builds?"

Great question and one of great debate. Hereare my thoughts and the perspective I push at my company.

F000 of anything PTC puts out will have some issues for our very complex use case. Our goal is to find and get fixed what is relevant to us and stabilize on a build as quickly as possible that still has opportunity to be fixed when in production for a few months. Normally PTC has the greatest number of dedicated resources to fix issues in the early stages of the release process. It will take us quite some time to test a build of a new version and despite our best efforts; we will still find further issues once in production. That entire timeline needs to be considered when looking at this, especially in complex implementations. (This is the reality with any major system by the way.)

While you will find a long list of things fixed in M010, if you wait to test at that point, you'll be in line somewhere out at M050 to see your particular issues addressed. (Hypothetical and exaggerated of course, sort of.) Typically by the time we are loading F000, we have the list of issues addressed in M010 and we can note and avoid them and get our fixes into M020 or M030.

I can almost guarantee no matter how many builds we wait for, there will be something we use that will need to be fixed. The danger of waiting too long to start evaluating is that the calls start getting answered with, "That's fixed in the next Version," and won't be addressed at all it what you just spent 2 months testing. Or worse, you've tested everything, gone live, and now the issues have to be worked around until you upgrade again.

Finding your sweet spot is all this is the real challenge. It depends greatly on the velocity of your initial load to production and the complexity and depth of your use of the products.If you have a short evaluation and release process, then waiting a few builds makes a lot of sense. For our complex and lengthy evaluation process, an early start makes a big difference.

For me, I don't buy the "Never go with F000" mantra. It's answering the wrong question.

Dan Glenn
Solar Turbines Incorporated