INTRALINK 3.4 vs. 8.0. Is it worth it?

[mdristy]

I haven't heard much about Intralink 8.0 lately.


I would appreciate comments on whether or not users think the upgrade from Intralink 3.4 to 8.0 is worth it.


Also, how difficult is the migration for a small business with just a thousand or soPro/E models?


Is PTC going to stop supporting 3.4 soon?


Thanks.

 

[sureshdesigns]

Hi
Intralink 8 is almost entirely different from Intralink
3.4 its similar like Pro-e 2001 to Pro-e WF. I our
company we are using Intralink 8 we are finding
difficult to use it.

I think no much users for Intralink 8. I had some
queries but I wasn't able to find the solution even in
MCAD Central.

 

[diego.peinado]

Intralink 3.4 One hundred million times better than Windchill 8.0


Intralink 3.4 is simple, reliable, it works. It do not have a 'lot' of marvelous functionalities, BUT it works. You have to concentrate in your work and not on what is going on today with java, tomcat, windchill, microsoft explorer, or whatever other stupid and not reliable technology these irreponsables of PTC. You can loose a lot of work (yes months of work) with this crap called windchill 8.0

 

[c_thompson_68]

Does Pro/Intralink 3.4 support Pro/E WF 4.0? If not, have you considered DesignDataManager (DDM)? Performing a search on this forum, several past discussions are available on DDM.

Currently, legacy data from Pro/Intralink needs to be exported before it can be imported into the DDM database.

 

[ankarl]

I read a notice a while ago that stated there will be support for 3.4 for WF4.
PTC changed their policy because of customers not migrating to other platforms as soon as they forecasted.

 

[deedub777]

If you don't have to upgrade then don't do it. I have used Intralink 3.x, PDMlink and DDM. Intralink is tops by far, closely followed by DDM then PDMlink a distant last.


I would however, clarify that the PDMlink I used was over a year ago so might be better now? For a small co, I would (and did) go for DDM. It has it's shortcomings but the workarounds and OK and the support is VERY responsive.


Good luck.

 

[Lazar]

Our company is looking to switch from Ilink to PDMlink as part of an agreement we have with PTC.


However, our site does not want to use Oracle, but SQL instead, since you need an equal set of Oracle licences to PDM link licences...which gets quite expensive. The problem is that PTC has all but abandoned the migrator tool they were working on to move from Oracle base Ilink to an SQL base PDMlink. So that puts a thorn in our side.


From what I have heard, PDMlink 9 has some marked improvements, incorporating some form of Ilink functionality.


We have pretty much held off our plan to upgrade to PDMlink for now....we will wait and see what happens and the revisit the idea in the late Spring.

 

[joebarnes]

Ilink 3.4 M060 was built to support WF4.0 and they made it available to maintence paying customers. Very generous.


Our problem right noe is that M060 no longer supports Windows 2000 server, it can only be installed on windows 2003 primarily because of the new version of oracle being used. Next to the last version ever of Intralink 3.4 and they stop supporting the operating system that most people were using for the server environment.


Windchill/INTRALINK 9.1 will be the first 8+ version to not have any missing functionaity(Hopefully). You will need WF4.0 & WI9.1to not lose any functionality. WF3.0 & WI9.1 will still lack workspace frames functionality.


WI 9.1 should be available Dec08-Jan09 time frame if they don't move it out again. If you haven't made the move to Windchill/INTRALINK yet, You should wait untill atleast WI9.1.


Our upgrade path as it stands now, so we don't lose any functionality, will be:


Upgrade Ilink server OS from Windows 2k server to Windows 2K3 server >> Upgrade WF3.0 to WF3.0 M170+ >> Upgrade Ilink 3.4 to M060 >> Upgrade WF3 to WF 4.0 M040+


Good luck


Joe

 

[elab.theken]

There are way too many things that do not work correctly in ProI8. Our VAR convinced us that 8.0 was the way to go 3 years ago when we made the switch to PTC because 3.4 was being phased out. Since our upgrade cycles are only once every 2-3 yrs, this seemed wise (but it wasn't).


We have been told that 9.0 will fix many of these issues. Will have to wait and see later this year when we install upgrades. If I had to do it over again, I would have installed 3.4. Evaluate everything you are currently doing in 3.4 and make sure that the functionality you need is available in the Windchill solution before you make the switch.

 

[fischdl]

We just migrated to Intralink 9.0. Most of our users are very disappointed with the results. It is MUCH less forgiving then 3.3 and we have lost frame manager and briefcase. It is making our daily life a lot harder. Stay with 3.3 to 3.4 as long as possible.

 

[mediumsliced]

Might I add that running Windchill 8.0+ requires more
server firepower than the classic 3.X series.

 

[mdristy]

Is Windchill 8.0 the same as Intralink 8.0?

 

[ixma2008]

Does anyone here has listen about PDMWorks Enterprise? i think is de Data Management solution for SolidWorks, does it is better than Intralink?

 

[looslib]

Intralink 8 is an application built on top of Windchill 8.


PDMLink 8 is an application built on top of Windchill 8.


As to server sizing, yes, the Windchill-based solutions do requie a lot more power than Intralink 3.x.

 

[jgray_globus]

You have mentioned that the SERVER will need a lot more POWER to run WI9.1.
Could you please tell me the minumum and/or suggested amount of POWER needed.
What kinda of SERVER Specs shoudl I be looking for?

Thanks
Jason

 

[williaps]

There are hardware sizing guides available from www.ptc.com. Here is an excerpt from one of those documents.
Windchill 8.0 Hardware Sizing Examples
Example 1: Medium Sized Company
A medium sized company needs a server or servers(s) to support 500 total
users, 200 CAD users, and 300 non-CAD users.
W

 

[jgray_globus]

Patrick, Thanks
I will take a closer look at PTC.com.
Off topic a little: You would have a good solid back-up script for iLink3.4 would you. I have been thrown under the bus with taking over the iLink data. And I know our currents back-ups, if you can even call them that, are not sufficient.
Thanks
Jason