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

Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

Regular Member

Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

We're looking into upgrading our Windchill PDMLink to either 10.0 or 10.1. I seem to remember issues being discussed with regards to 10.1 that is making me question whether we want to go that route or stick with 10.0.


In an effort to assist me banging my head against a wall to jog my memory, plus searching around for issues related to 10.1, I'm interested in what the user community has to say about any pitfalls 10.0 or 10.1 may have relative to each other.


Thanks.

7 REPLIES 7

Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

That depends on your implementation scope. I can cite pitfalls with the MPMLink product but if you're not targeting that software then that information wouldn't be useful to you.

Patrick Williams | Engineering Systems | c: 616.947.2110
[cid:image001.jpg@01CD9BCB.5B4F6A50]

Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

We are on 10.0 M020 with a lot of PTC patches. We recently evaluated
whether we should go to 10.1 M020 next, or if we should go to 10.0 M040
next. We decided that going to 10.1 M020 from 10.0 M020 would be better:
similar effort; more bug fixes; more features that we may use in the
future; greater options for current and future CREO versions; an extra
year or so of supportability on that version; similar user interfaces and
processes so that we don't have to do training for end users either way.

If I were starting now, I would certainly go with 10.1 M020.

Al







[solutions] - RE: Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

Williams, Patrick

RE: Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

Hello Patrick



If you do not mind, I am interested in the issues you know with MPMLink. (for both mBOM and Process Plan)


thank you

RE: Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1

Summary:


I received several responses that didn't appear in this thread, all of which lead me to believe my memory about the pitfalls of 10.1 were unfounded. Most of the issues discussed were found in the 10.0 early datecodes, with a couple people saying they haven't seen the scope of problems with 10.1 that they had with 10.0. Special thanks to Mike Lockwood who sent a huge spreadsheet full of 10.0 problems he encountered (not all of which apply to out implementation) which were all fixed in 10.1.


Thanks to all who replied.

RE: Windchill PDMLink 10.0 vs 10.1



In Reply to Don Senchuk:



Summary:


I received several responses that didn't appear in this thread, all of which lead me to believe my memory about the pitfalls of 10.1 were unfounded. Most of the issues discussed were found in the 10.0 early datecodes, with a couple people saying they haven't seen the scope of problems with 10.1 that they had with 10.0. Special thanks to Mike Lockwood who sent a huge spreadsheet full of 10.0 problems he encountered (not all of which apply to out implementation) which were all fixed in 10.1.


Thanks to all who replied.




This is good to know because we just implemented for the first time ever, Windchill PDMLink 10.1 M020. I am in the process of migrating data into it and I am still in the testing phase to make sure everything is working as intended.


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

Windchill 10.1

So, for anyone on 10.1 who upgraded from 10.0, what kind of issues are y'all seeing? We haven't had a pleasant time of it so far.

Thanks!
Brian Krieger

Windchill 10.1

We are in the final stages of moving from 10.0 (M020 with patches) with
Creo Elements Pro 5 (M120) to 10.1 (M020 with patches) with Creo Elements
Pro 5 (M170). Our go live for 10.1 is April 15.

Observations so far include...

1) The interface is similar enough that we do not need to do any special
end user training. We plan to e-mail a "What's New In Windchill"
newsletter to users, and continue to use training material developed for
10.0 without modification.

2) The upgrade is smoother and faster this time than in any previous
upgrade (5.0 to 5.1, 5.1 to 6.0, 6.0 to 6.2.6, 6.2.6 to 8.0, 8.0 to 9.1,
9.1 to 10.0, and now 10.0 to 10.1). We started this upgrade close to
November 1, 2012; go live is April 15, 2013; we took two weeks off for the
holidays; that makes this about a 5-month upgrade effort.

3) Most of the problems we have found have been relatively minor for which
PTC has been able to provide a patch. For example, in 10.1 M020 when you
make a new Task list filter, the task list seems to go into a loop that
repeatedly flashes a white page at the user until the user navigates off
the page, and then goes back to their task list, at which point the user
can use the new filter. There have been several others, but we've logged
SPRs for them and are satisfied with tech support at PTC's response to
each of them.

4) We continue to be plagued by the fact that it is taking years for all
of our users to get off of Windows XP, forcing us to use IE8 for XP users,
and IE9 for Windows 7 users. IE8 is so slow that we need Google Chrome
Frame. But in 10.1 we find new IE9+GCF+latest JRE problems on a few
interfaces and a few custom reports that consume a lot of our time trying
to make IE8+GCF+JRE work in all parts of Windchill (including our own
enhancements) with IE9+GCF+JRE. Our parent company is looking at
approving Chrome for general use, but we have not fully tested that. I
hope that later this year we can test and fix Chrome in order to get all
Windchill users on Chrome - which does better in terms of performance,
especially for structure related pages, than any version of IE.

5) We still need an on-site PTC consultant to do the upgrade efficiently.
We have our own IT staff and Windchill experts, but every time we do an
upgrade, we get at least one GSO person on site. I would not want to do
this upgrade without at least one decent GSO guy on site with us.

Al Anderson