“We just moved from Pro/PDM to Pro/INTRALINK 3.x, and now it looks like we’ll have to move yet again. Why are you doing this, PTC?”

I’ve received this question from several people lately, and I suspect that there are many more of you out there with the same concern. I believe that the blogs from Jim Heppelman and the rest of us – as well as the forums and the whitepapers – have adequately addressed the question. But, since I’m short of other things to write about, here’s my answer, structured in the manner of the U.S. Declaration of Independence (with apologies to our non-U.S. readers – and with no apologies to the U.S. citizens who should be fluent in the original document!)

“When in the course of software development it becomes necessary for one company to dissolve the multiple development streams which have disconnected workgroup data management from enterprise PLM and to assume among the PLM powers of the earth, the separate but far superior station of PLM leader to which the Laws of Internet Architecture and of a true Product Development System entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of Pro/INTRALINK 3.x customers requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that not all data management systems are equal, that a true PLM system must be endowed by its developers with certain inalienable architecture traits, that among these are Integral, Internet, and Interoperable. – That to maintain these traits, a development group was instituted among PTC, deriving its just mission from the need to develop this application, – That whenever any Form of Software becomes inhibitive of these ends, it is the Right of the Company to alter or abolish it, and to implement one Application, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its code in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect customers’ Productivity and Efficiency. Prudence, indeed, has dictated that Software long established should not be retired for light and transient causes; and accordingly PTC’s past experience hath shewn that customers are more disposed to suffer, while limited WAN performance, client-server architecture, and a divided development stream are sufferable than to right themselves by demanding a true Product Development System. But when a long train of customers’ requests cannot be met due to Pro/INTRALINK 3.x’s Design, it is the customers’ right, and PTC’s duty, to throw off such Software, and to provide new Windchill architecture for their future security…”

There is more, but I suspect that your time is as valuable as mine, so I’ll leave you with that. I think you get the idea.

New York:

Jeff Rembold