network cad3d designers in italy

[radio]

What are the names?

Okay, I give up, I'll do the infamous and I'll get the names! :biggrin:

that "easy" and ganttproject, really immediate, few options, but quite complete, at least for me; ideal for beginners.
the other is Openproj, much more complete, multi-project, allows the "rischeduling" (says so?), it is possible, at any time, to compare for example between the time anticipated for the various phases and how effectively employed; I go a little bit to memory because as I said I left it a little lost, for the moment.
I had thrown an eye even up http://project-open that in all probability is "better" of the first two, but I was looking for a "basic" tool but that had sufficient functionality for my needs.
You want more? There they are!
small note: I have no specific preparation for this discipline anything but trivial, and I have certainly not become an expert peeking and messing with a couple of software; but where I work the project planning, faced (male) long ago, is now neglected in the name or of the daily and perennial "emergencies", or of frequent activities on specific orders that distract resources from the main project, with the consequence that it becomes very difficult to understand who has arrived where, how far the term of a specific activity has to be moved, and how far the term of the whole project has come.
until we work so, it doesn't make much sense talking about project planning and use of specific software! :frown:

p.s. anyone you know and/or use such tools and want to discuss it, do not be shy!
possibly even in another discussion not to go too much on this.

 

[Matteo]

You say so because you know this kind of sofware and it seems to you something decent, or why does it look promising at a first glance?

But if we continue like this, we are going to do so...re ozzy:biggrin:

no no, if we talk about ozzy performance is right, consider that I am the one that pushes to start with the least inexpensive: if we really want a management system, at least we do a test (and this lends itself to the tests). I also had dbworks that is a commercial software.

 

[radio]

no no, if we talk about ozzy performance is right, consider that I am the one that pushes to start with the least inexpensive: if we really want a management system, at least we do a test (and this lends itself to the tests). I also had dbworks that is a commercial software.

I agree, the good of starting from zero is that you have no constraints with the foregone, so once decided the goal some proof you can do.

 

[cacciatorino]

a software to manage workflows makes thinking of a fairly complex structure, with project leader, performers, progress stage verification, etc., in short, one thing where many supervise the only one who works (typical Italian problem). instead of what I understand the consortium would serve for: "Do you need the planner? We got him. Do you have to design the robot eplication? here is the specialist!, etc. thinking about doing teamwork with everyone using a different cad, and everyone living in a different city, I think it's pretty complicated.

Maybe at first what you need at a soft level is a document storage system (specifics, documentation, orders, invoices (sperably)). Maybe to start just a space on dropbox or google-docs, structured well.

This until you need to work on a project more than one person. When this becomes necessary, you have to have the same cad senno, you spend more time making conversions than to work, and the databases must be one each at his home, with night synchronization or otherwise scheduled. It's not like someone can think of working on a db that's 500 km away, it would mean taking a coffee break every time you save.

 

[Matteo]

a software to manage workflows makes thinking of a fairly complex structure, with project leader, performers, progress stage verification, etc., in short, one thing where many supervise the only one who works (typical Italian problem). instead of what I understand the consortium would serve for: "Do you need the planner? We got him. Do you have to design the robot eplication? here is the specialist!, etc. thinking about doing teamwork with everyone using a different cad, and everyone living in a different city, I think it's pretty complicated.

Maybe at first what you need at a soft level is a document storage system (specifics, documentation, orders, invoices (sperably)). Maybe to start just a space on dropbox or google-docs, structured well.

This until you need to work on a project more than one person. When this becomes necessary, you have to have the same cad senno, you spend more time making conversions than to work, and the databases must be one each at his home, with night synchronization or otherwise scheduled. It's not like someone can think of working on a db that's 500 km away, it would mean taking a coffee break every time you save.

I agree, in the initial phase it seems to me that this is the right direction.:finger:

 

[radio]

a software to manage workflows makes thinking of a fairly complex structure, with project leader, performers, progress stage verification, etc., in short, one thing where many supervise the only one who works (typical Italian problem). instead of what I understand the consortium would serve for: "Do you need the planner? We got him. Do you have to design the robot eplication? here is the specialist!, etc. thinking about doing teamwork with everyone using a different cad, and everyone living in a different city, I think it's pretty complicated.

Maybe at first what you need at a soft level is a document storage system (specifics, documentation, orders, invoices (sperably)). Maybe to start just a space on dropbox or google-docs, structured well.

This until you need to work on a project more than one person. When this becomes necessary, you have to have the same cad senno, you spend more time making conversions than to work, and the databases must be one each at his home, with night synchronization or otherwise scheduled. It's not like someone can think of working on a db that's 500 km away, it would mean taking a coffee break every time you save.

Hi hunting, how are you?
You're the one who took us back to the ground.
However, the hypothesis of a team of people who manage to work on the same project at thousands of km away and with different tools is fascinating, science fiction but fascinating.
to find a homogeneous group as skills and that you use the same cad will be difficult, and to equip yourself with more tools to use depending on the project to follow is not at the reach of everyone, neither hypothesized, at least at the beginning.
if there were sw rental solutions, for limited periods of time, to which to resort according to the needs would not be bad though.

 

[lattu]

a software to manage workflows makes thinking of a fairly complex structure, with project leader, performers, progress stage verification, etc., in short, one thing where many supervise the only one who works (typical Italian problem). instead of what I understand the consortium would serve for: "Do you need the planner? We got him. Do you have to design the robot eplication? here is the specialist!, etc. thinking about doing teamwork with everyone using a different cad, and everyone living in a different city, I think it's pretty complicated.

Maybe at first what you need at a soft level is a document storage system (specifics, documentation, orders, invoices (sperably)). Maybe to start just a space on dropbox or google-docs, structured well.

This until you need to work on a project more than one person. When this becomes necessary, you have to have the same cad senno, you spend more time making conversions than to work, and the databases must be one each at his home, with night synchronization or otherwise scheduled. It's not like someone can think of working on a db that's 500 km away, it would mean taking a coffee break every time you save.

quoto in toto.
I agree with 101%

 

[re_solidworks]

I answer with my opinion a little 'to all recent interventions regarding management orders and pdm. I think it's two distinct things, at least for the moment.
there are large international industrial realities that with the pdm can collaborate offices around the world: It's just about defining who does what and the best tool to do it is just the pdm. the problem is that a pdm that best manages an articulated situation like this costs a bang between purchase, infrastructure (dedicated servers, etc...) and especially personalizations. in case of prehistoric adsl like our Italians you might think of communicating more databases in which to manage in real time only metadata and then synchronize patterns / drawings during the night (all automatically).
we do not have to manage the production of the products, but only the design phase for which a expensive part of the customizations would jump. In any case I think it is too high to deal with, we must be careful because the spirit of consortium must be the union of workers, but with an eye attentive to market costs for design.
This tool is used to keep us together and allow us to work together, but it does not directly increase individual productivity.
Basically if you face a megaproject in which you serve 50 designers a pdm is a must and you can not choose whether to take it or not. becomes an indispensable tool for which those who ask for this project expect costs aligned with the equipment necessary to realize it, if instead they face projects for groups of 3-5 people the costs go out market and you can not take the orders.
I add that a multicad pdm handles all... but only one or no one optimally.
how can a tool simultaneously exploit the bees of 5 - 6 packages cad?
I from this point of view are used well as ready2works manages very well solidworks and does not limit itself to the functions of pdm and cycle life document, but it has a lot of utilities that daily make me so much easier in work.
In addition, the rest of the idea is that projects should be carried out with a single cad solution to have the maximum integration between working groups.
the use of several packages must depend solely on technical requirements of design and not availability of an office rather than another, otherwise we calculate productivity and consortium becomes once again a way to increase costs and not productivity.
In essence at first I would not evaluate anything like pdm, we must be cautious and see if members actually integrate with each other and this collaboration becomes a real possibility. In any case I displeased to face the pdm adventure with opensource tools, it would be just a negative experience that would spread distrust to all pdms.

 

[re_solidworks]

I think it is essential to have someone above the parts that check that work is done properly.
In my opinion we must define parameters (based on the amounts of orders) that make us choose how to control the order. for example for orders up to 5000 euros there will be no project managers, only a commercial manager who will have to interact directly with the job.
from 5000 to 50000 you put a project manager that plans, talks to the working groups and keeps everyone in step with the commitments made with the customer. above the 50,000 I would foresee the possibility of having even 2/3 project managers depending on the complexity of the project and that these should interact with a commission (3-4 expert technicians belonging to the group) for the most important decisions and to see that everything is in line with the expectations of customers.
It seems to me a good way to assign the necessary resources without impacting too much on overall costs.
project managers should be specialized in this job, experience or degree with management specialization.

 

[maxopus]

ok ragassuoli, on this topic (pdm) it seems that everyone agrees.
We will face the problem in due time and if there is need.
Now we have to focus on a draft program.
I'm a little busy this morning I got up at 5:00 and I'll have until 11:00 tonight.
tomorrow will be like today and next week will be almost the same.
from Monday 10 I will put my hands on the material I have and I will submit a document that will be the basis of discussion.
Once we have settled this step, we have to think about a meeting to meet ourselves in person and make decisions.
first we start and better it is, whatever the outcome of the affair

 

[gfrank]

....
and databases must be one each at his home, with night synchronization or however scheduled. It's not like someone can think of working on a db that's 500 km away, it would mean taking a coffee break every time you save.

for constructive purpose mark this information:
aruba cloud computing: the revolution in the world it economical, simple, flexible, safe: is aruba cloud computing.

preview the service by joining the beta phase!

aruba cloud computing is the service designed to create virtual datacenters of any size and complexity in a simple way, without waste of time and money.
with visualcloud, in fact, the infrastructure design is an intuitive operation and within reach of all, thanks to the graphic visualization of the structure and the resources used.

aruba cloud computing is flexible and scalable: at any time in fact it is possible to increase or reduce the structure and change the characteristics of virtual machines such as cpu, ram, space and quantity of disks.
thanks to the "pay per use" system and the hourly rate will be possible to break down the waste by paying only the resources used.

the technical structure of aruba finally guarantees the safety, redundancy and high performance of the service, characteristics that make aruba cloud computing the ideal solution for those who want to have advanced and flexible tools without worrying about management and maintenance.

Want to test the service features for free?

request membership of the beta phase and hurry, the availability of vouchers is limited!

do not hesitate to try aruba cloud computing and send your feedback and suggestions thus helping to increase the functionality of the service!

 

[linch]

I think it is essential to have someone above the parts that check that work is done properly.
In my opinion we must define parameters (based on the amounts of orders) that make us choose how to control the order. for example for orders up to 5000 euros there will be no project managers, only a commercial manager who will have to interact directly with the job.
from 5000 to 50000 you put a project manager that plans, talks to the working groups and keeps everyone in step with the commitments made with the customer. above the 50,000 I would foresee the possibility of having even 2/3 project managers depending on the complexity of the project and that these should interact with a commission (3-4 expert technicians belonging to the group) for the most important decisions and to see that everything is in line with the expectations of customers.
It seems to me a good way to assign the necessary resources without impacting too much on overall costs.
project managers should be specialized in this job, experience or degree with management specialization.

I'm sorry, but I have some perplexity.
the figure of the project manager outside the project I would leave it to the big companies that can boast of the profits so that they can afford it.
our project managers must already be within the working group that you want to create, and they will simply be the most experienced people in their fields.
Such "responsibles" will have the arduous task of coordinating their work in symbiosis with other specialists.
We cannot afford external figures that are not active in work.
I think it is indispensable in the future, a commercial figure that wanders for the various lids, brings to the industrial world the "good news".

 

[maxopus]

more than 7,000 visits in 11 days, I think it's important

 

[re_solidworks]

I'm sorry, but I have some perplexity.
the figure of the project manager outside the project I would leave it to the big companies that can boast of the profits so that they can afford it.
our project managers must already be within the working group that you want to create, and they will simply be the most experienced people in their fields.
Such "responsibles" will have the arduous task of coordinating their work in symbiosis with other specialists.
We cannot afford external figures that are not active in work.
I think it is indispensable in the future, a commercial figure that wanders for the various lids, brings to the industrial world the "good news".

I also have perplexity doing as you suggest and give you my motivation. first of all a technician who can design breaks the boxes to do the pm, indeed I would say that his way of reasoning does not marry too much with what he has to have a pm. second if he is a designer who is part of the team of work will never be impartial to the other collaborators of the network, this person must also cut the head to the bull in a weighted way and above the parts when there are choices or when it serves "to give a set" to the working group.
For example I would never do the pm, I do it in my study with my employees, but I would not agree to do it with third parties. and idem if what I am like pm is the owner of another study and begins to work in a way not too impartial...well I would hardly accept its provisions.
for this would serve a person above the parts. I participated in some important project and the pm is a fundamental figure, as long as it is not part and competent on how to manage the times and synchronisms between the working groups.
if we put one of us we set up an amateur who combines + screws that other.

 

[Fulvio Romano]

once so much I agree with linch that with re_solidworks. a pm is a "glue" between the different designers and between consortium, customer and any third parties.
the fact that you work or not full time as pm depends only on the size of the project.
Moreover the pm also has the task to manage the documentation. attention, it depends on the project, but it is not an aspect to be underestimated. designing a machine for a European, Russian, Chinese or Brazilian customer is not the same in terms of certification or documentation. It happened to me that they built the most beautiful machine in the world, they ship it in the cine, and there it is blocked by customs because of the packaging. a pm that you respect knows very well that the wooden pallets without certificate of fumigation in cina cannot enter, thus saving two months of shipments.
here is just an example to understand what craft does a pm. I often do the pm for small projects, and I assure you that it is a commitment of all respect, both in terms of time and in terms of medicines for the liver.. .

 

[re_solidworks]

once so much I agree with linch that with re_solidworks. a pm is a "glue" between the different designers and between consortium, customer and any third parties.
the fact that you work or not full time as pm depends only on the size of the project.
Moreover the pm also has the task to manage the documentation. attention, it depends on the project, but it is not an aspect to be underestimated. designing a machine for a European, Russian, Chinese or Brazilian customer is not the same in terms of certification or documentation. It happened to me that they built the most beautiful machine in the world, they ship it in the cine, and there it is blocked by customs because of the packaging. a pm that you respect knows very well that the wooden pallets without certificate of fumigation in cina cannot enter, thus saving two months of shipments.
here is just an example to understand what craft does a pm. I often do the pm for small projects, and I assure you that it is a commitment of all respect, both in terms of time and in terms of medicines for the liver.. .

I'm sorry, but I'm sorry. Would you see us a designer doing the pm? without specific training? What kind of professionalism would you do with this job?
eye that if the pm does not carry out its task impeccablely is a trouble for everyone working on the project....
as I have already said a person can not improvise pm from day to day, and a designer who has a set of works to perform at times can not afford to divert the attention from the project to listen to the problems/dubs of others.
In my opinion, people prepared on this matter or it is better to give up big orders, but at this point it would fall a little bit all the speech "you will".

 

[Matteo]

I think we are making confusion between "managing a great project together as if we were a single technical office" and "managing a network of technical offices" where every job would be managed by 2 parts, who puts the customer and manages the job and who does it from an exclusively technical point of view. that it is possible to do both things is true, but not immediately.

 

[Meccbell]

You're packing... :frown:

max, make it quick to put down 's 4 basic points, which otherwise we talk here to go on mars before even designing a battery tricycle. :biggrin:

(you notice the "end" allusion? :

 

[maxopus]

You're packing... :frown:

max, make it quick to put down 's 4 basic points, which otherwise we talk here to go on mars before even designing a battery tricycle. :biggrin:

(you notice the "end" allusion? :

I have to see that by tomorrow, because from Wednesday to Friday I'm on the road.
Let them have fun, then they will discover the hard land:biggrin:

 

[marcof]

max, make it quick to put down 'ti 4 basic points, which otherwise we talk here to go on mars before even having designed a tricycle a batteria. :biggrin:

Is it not that you wanted to write "carrozzina"?

(you notice the "end" allusion? :

Alluded? What is alluded to?