PC-DMIS Enhancements via Google Moderator

I am somewhat in Wes's court on this one. If someonereally listens, they would have heard what the real issues are.

I think that fundamentally the problem with PC-DMIS is that it has a fragile feel to it. It seems to be cobled together with some units having a mind of their own, and not really playing ball with other portions of the software. Experienced users know exactly what works and what does not. You learn, the hard way, to avoid time wasting options, because they will cause problems later on.

I work mainly with 2 packages: LabView from NI and PC-DMIS. LabView is HEAVEN compared to PC-DMIS. It is so incredibly robust and powerful. It is elegant and seems to always work as described. The documentation is fabulous. They have examples up the whazoo. And for that wonderful product, you pay $4k for the complete full version with all bells and whistles!

Then I have to work with PC-DMIS. I have to back-up every second of the day because serialization:alt is looming behind every key stroke, wiping out my program. I am installing 2010 now on WIN7: why do I have to first install 2010, delete it and install 2009, delete it and then re-install 2010? That's the only way to get it to work (same procedure on 4 different computers now). Try to use a "-" in a feature name (oh what fun). And on and on. It is a great tool but it is expensive and fragile.

Why can NI create a product for $4k that is incredibly robust? PC-DMIS is expensive and remains cluttered and not cohesive, while providing great functionality if you know how to circumvent the pitfalls.

In the past, I have compared PC-DMIS with a fixer upper. Somebody, long time ago, build a small nice little house. Then another person build on a family room. Another one a bedroom. Then a play room. Then later a nice rec room etc etc etc. The house now has all the amenities and 10,000 sqft, but it just feels as if there was no plan behind all this. It is just a hodgepodge of functionality, thrown together somewhat willly-nilly. That's the problem with PC-DMIS. It has all you want, but you have to work hard at making it do what you want it to do. And that turns into people worried about ROI: it is just hard to justify sometimes.

My advice has always been, and will remain, that nothing but a build from scratch, can fix this problem. It is the same as going to an architect and have that person design you a 10,000sqft house and build this home from scratch. Yes, I know, sounds like XactMeasure all over again. I am a user, not a programmer. Why can NI do it and why can Hexagon not? Maybe you ought to hire some people away from NI (but then again, don't: I like my LabView).

I am somewhat in Wes's court on this one. If someonereally listens, they would have heard what the real issues are.

I think that fundamentally the problem with PC-DMIS is that it has a fragile feel to it. It seems to be cobled together with some units having a mind of their own, and not really playing ball with other portions of the software. Experienced users know exactly what works and what does not. You learn, the hard way, to avoid time wasting options, because they will cause problems later on.

I work mainly with 2 packages: LabView from NI and PC-DMIS. LabView is HEAVEN compared to PC-DMIS. It is so incredibly robust and powerful. It is elegant and seems to always work as described. The documentation is fabulous. They have examples up the whazoo. And for that wonderful product, you pay $4k for the complete full version with all bells and whistles!

Then I have to work with PC-DMIS. I have to back-up every second of the day because serialization:alt is looming behind every key stroke, wiping out my program. I am installing 2010 now on WIN7: why do I have to first install 2010, delete it and install 2009, delete it and then re-install 2010? That's the only way to get it to work (same procedure on 4 different computers now). Try to use a "-" in a feature name (oh what fun). And on and on. It is a great tool but it is expensive and fragile.

Why can NI create a product for $4k that is incredibly robust? PC-DMIS is expensive and remains cluttered and not cohesive, while providing great functionality if you know how to circumvent the pitfalls.

In the past, I have compared PC-DMIS with a fixer upper. Somebody, long time ago, build a small nice little house. Then another person build on a family room. Another one a bedroom. Then a play room. Then later a nice rec room etc etc etc. The house now has all the amenities and 10,000 sqft, but it just feels as if there was no plan behind all this. It is just a hodgepodge of functionality, thrown together somewhat willly-nilly. That's the problem with PC-DMIS. It has all you want, but you have to work hard at making it do what you want it to do. And that turns into people worried about ROI: it is just hard to justify sometimes.

My advice has always been, and will remain, that nothing but a build from scratch, can fix this problem. It is the same as going to an architect and have that person design you a 10,000sqft house and build this home from scratch. Yes, I know, sounds like XactMeasure all over again. I am a user, not a programmer. Why can NI do it and why can Hexagon not? Maybe you ought to hire some people away from NI (but then again, don't: I like my LabView).