Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

DesignDataManager vs Windchill

Deedub,


What do you think of DDM thus far?


We're just in the process of implementing it here. We have a kind of funky system going here, with both 64-bit and 32-bit versions of WF 2.0. We found late in the game (due to a lack of communication from our IT department, and after issuing a PO for the software) that DDM wasn't fully compatible with our system (in particular the 64-bit version of 2.0).In two day's time they had re-coded in order to be compliant. My hat's off to them for that - especially considering the fact that we only purchased a couple of seats.


The support has been great. If the software is as good as the support, we'll be satisfied. I'll let you know in a while my thoughts on the system as implemented.
 
I would steer clear of Data Design Manager (DDM).

Here's why. There have been several postings in the forum and others where DDM fans, and even those affiliated with the company that provides DDM. But none of those address the specific issues that plague Pro/E when it comes to data management systems. Pro/E suffers from several issues:
  1. Pro/E changes the filename extension with each version of a file that is saved. This breaks most data management and concurrent versioning systems, as they expect different versions of the same file to have the same filename and extension.
  2. Pro/E works on files in memory, so a normal file system has no way of knowing when a file is changed.
  3. Pro/E does not "lock" files when they are opened by a user. Again, this is because Pro/E reads the file into memory and does all the changes there. When the changes are stored, they are stored into a different file name (extension is incremented).
  4. PTC has not adequately exposed the the working of the file and memory management system. Even the expensive Pro/Toolkit API does not provide the functionality, nor the documentation to properly and gracefully deal with data management.
The postings touting Data Design Manager do not address the specific issues that forum posters are complaining about. Instead they constitute little more than blatant advertisements for their product. Notice that one poster in this topic never responds to the questions after plugging their product. One does not need to have experience using a product to come to the conclusion to "steer clear". The conclusion can rightfully be made from examining the practice of using these forums as a free vehicle to "plug" the purported virtues of their product.
 
Hi damormino,

You're welcome to steer clear of DesignDataManager That is up to you, but I disagree that the fora do not address the issues raised. I also take real issue with your comment that all the posters are just plugging their product. I have no association with the providers of DDM as either a representative or reseller, only as a satisfied customer.

Answer me this. Why are so many users looking at alternatives to PTC data management products? I submit that the underlying reason is that the PTC data management offering does not cut it for SMEs, on the basis of price, internal company overhead and service.

You say, "One does not need to have experience using a product to come to the conclusion to "steer clear"". I suppose you add salt to your meals without tasting it first....
 
Before I post this I should remind you that I am ex-PTC and I now work for a PTC reseller. However I recently read this comment on the PTC/USER (www.ptcuser.org) website I thought it valid to re-post it here.

This is a post from a Pro/ENGINEER user in response to a question about using MatrixOne to manage Pro/ENGINEER data but the content is relevant to this discussion. I think he hits the nail on the head rather well...

We spent most of 2004 researching PLM, and didn't buy Windchill until Dec 2004.
We were using Intralink 3.3 at the time. We
were forced by corporate to look at all vendors / software and show
objectively why we selected one. All of us involved with Pro/E could
see immediately where the problems were with the non-PTC solutions, but
it took a lot to show objectively.
PTC said "nobody else is going to be able to manage Pro/E relationships."
All the other vendors said "yes, we mange Pro/E - no problem."
We
asked PTC for a challenge fileset and procedure - couldn't get one. So
we made our own - as sent previously. It has extremely simple
geometry, but all relationships we could think of. All systems except
Windchill hopelessly failed almost all steps. This testing /
challenge resulted in about 100 small changes to Windchill, but
Windchill was very good on all areas.
I
would highly recommend just creating a small assembly using all Pro/E
relationships that you normally use or every think about using. Check
it into Intralink, then go thru a bunch of actions: check out (latest
and as stored), rename, work concurrently, add instances to family
tables, swap instances, update a layout, etc., etc. Intralink handles
all these with no problem. Windchill PDMLink does as well. All other
systems get stuck very quickly - they're not even in the same universe
in terms of functionality.
I
can't seem to find all the executive summary stuff we did as a result -
but various (mostly in preliminary stage) other are attached - hope
they are helpful. Can't stress enough though - that it's best to
create your own and challenge the vendors to show that the system can
work with it. We were in meetings where the salesman was saying "yes,
sure we can" while the application engineer on the other side of the
table was saying "oh, no we can't do that."

People are looking at alternates to PTC because it is only prudent to do so. If I was buying anything I know I would look at all the options (particularly when the seemingly obvious solution is so expensive and complex).
 
I have two responses at this time.


1. The management here won't invest in any of PTC's PLM solutions because they don't want to spend the money. So, unfortunately, in my case, any arguments for Intralink or Windchill are simply moot. Honestly, my first instinct would be to really check out PTC's solutions thoroughly, as they hold all the cards, so to speak. Unfortunately, it's not an option for me. My hands are tied.


2. Well, I just deleted a long rant I had typed here about one of these company's people contacting me and making unfounded accusations about me simply because I had quoted a veteran engineer/ProE user/PLM user who didn't have good things to say about his company. I'll just say it would be nice to have less meddling from the providers - I totally agree with Dave Amorminto on that. Guaranteed they're reading this right now. I may hear from some of them again.


The idea was that I would actually research these companies independently, using this forum and other means, to find out how people feel about their software and support. At that point, I would contact the companies I was most interested in. This way, hopefully, I might hear the straight scoop without all of the backbiting and sales techniques that these people obviously use. Apparently they won't allow someone to do that without interfering.


When will people grow up?
 
I'm not defending PTC's strategy from a sales standpoint... Verge, your managers are probably right, it is too expensive... and BigD, you've got a point too, it's possibly too complex (too much IT overhead).

However I am trying to make the point that from a technical standpoint PTC holds all the cards. They've got Pro/ENGINEER users by the bXXXs! If you want to use the powerful/complex bits of Pro/ENGINEER then you are going to need one of PTC's data management tools to manage the resulting data.

As long as this is the case (and I can't see it changing) PTC is going to continue to exploit that fact and make money from it. Unfortunately that is what companies with an effective "monopoly" do, because their shareholders demand it!
 
Touche...(all right, so it's supposed to have an accent over the e - not an option here in the states!)
 
Alright, let's get down to it.
This question is directed at current DDM users ONLY.
Please do not response if you work for DDM in some way or if you have never used DDM before:


What are your biggest problems with using DDM.


I've seen plenty of information to know the general pro/con arguements between PTC solution and DDM. But I often find that the dealbreakers come down to one thing that is crucial to whateveryour company'sprocesses may be.


Again if you have never actualy used DDM before, I am not interested in your opinion in regard to this specific question.
 
HI,

We're working with DDM for about a year now (14 seats). We had installed PDMLink 8.0 (M000) and moved away from this software because too complex, too slow, ....
We wanted a system that could manage our models and BOM's in an efficient and easy manner. We found this functionality in DDM.
When we first looked at DDM, it was missing some functionality that we needed but CSI was able to add the required functionality. Our biggest problem with DDM was the import of PDMmodels. There is no automatic translationtool (as far as I know) to convert models/drawings from PDMLink into DDM. We decided to convert on the fly and let PDMlink die slowly.
 
I Direct this response at those who knock DDM or who have never seen this software in action. There is a 45 day evaluation (full working Version) available to any one who wants it for FREE, so to the knockers out there shut up and download DDM and at least try it.


To the potential users with an open mind download it and give it a go. I have been using this software for 2 years and have absolutely no complaints, I have used intralink since its inception so I am not talking out of my A... The one thing about the people at DDM is that they have 2 ears and one mouth so they do twice as much listening as they do talking and it shows in there product.


Max Weston.
 
Hello,

We've had DDM since 2004 and it is working OK for us. We now have 5 seats of Pro and DDM. Our assemblies are fairly simple, but we needed rev control etc. In my previous job, I was engineering manager in the UK for a division of a large US oilfield services company, where my group piloted Pro/E, intralink and windchill, so have experience of the high end. We had dedicated CAD admins, also a guy who spent all his time looking at windchill workflows. He's probably still there. Fine if you're a multi bn$ company....
smiley2.gif


In answer to rbrgr83's question, the one thing that would be useful, is duplicating items from within DDM. As it stands, assemblies etc need to be in session.

We've had some minor problems with the systems itself, but the support from CSI has been excellent. For example, we thought had a problem with the floating licence system dropping liecences all the time, but it turned out to be Sharepoint screwing things up on our server. CSI remotely logged into our server sorted the clash between Sharepoint and licence manager. As a small company, we do not have a dedicated CAD admin guy.
smiley19.gif
Our IT support is really limited to windows server, exchange etc., so we need an easy to maintain system.
 
Mark: I've heard nothing but rave reviews about CSI's tech support and willingness to help out with whatever problems their customers have with their products.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" />


BigD: My big concern (having not used the software) was how it handless things like duplicating parts, replacing parts, renaming parts, etc. The consensus seems to be that it's not any worse than having to do this with ProE standalone, would you agree with that assessment??


Max: Thank you for your.....emotional opinions on the matter. It's good to see that you've used DDM for 2 years and had "absolutely no complaints". I can safely say I've never used any software or talked to anyone who's ever usedany software and had ABSOLUTELY no complaints over a span of time such as 2 years. The fact may be that it works much much better than its alternatives, but i'm glad that you're in a situation where you would not change or attempt to improve one single aspect of the program as a whole. Kudos.


But as far as DDM goes, I'm more or less convinced that it's Pros do in fact outweigh it's Cons, and by quite a large margin. For my company's situation, I would have an infinitely larger number of complaints about any given PTC solution. Thanks everyone for sharing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top