Obsolete but it serve for the purpose.

Hi Scarlet

MS Excel is a poor shadow of the original spreadsheet - Lotus 123.

The far superior Lotus software was smothered by Microsoft so what comes around goes around.

Don’t be surprised when Google come up with a better bit of kit than excell - and the sooner the better.

Best regards

Mike Testro.

Hi All,

This is a interesting discussion and complex one too. The decision of who chose what product is all about market power.

Take this an example, "WordPerfect" or "WordStar" I forgot already, use to be the must known skill for a office staff its hard to learn all the different key stroke. It is the prefer "NOT Perfect" word processing tool (back in the 80’s)

The world had change, why, market power for similar result.
Who change it, the market I guess but you may ask HOW...
MS make their product so easy to learn and so cheap to learn, simple everyone can use it. The create this massive supply (People who know how to use it) in the market, the WS and WP no longer an unique skill, and that is the turning point, since you can hire someone easily with the similar result, which one you prefer, the low risk option of course.

As for planning software go it is the same, try to put an AD for a experienced PP or Spider Project planner compare to a P6/P3 planner. Which one you will get an application for the job.... P3/P6 of course. The market power is there already there for P3/P6, for any other product to break that cycle, you need free training and free product (or at least low cost) AND these training need to offer to all the existing P3/P6 users

You may argue that there is a different between word processing software and planning software. Planning does have the Intellectual Property bit (Brain Power) that is make planner unique skill set. Correct, that is why they have to offer this training to existing user in order to gain market share.

If that happen, P3 or P6 will soon be dead..... (Give too much away for Spider Project marketing manager)

BTW one important qualifier need to be met as well which is "Similar Result if not better” That why MSP fail... because their Product Fail to produce the same result.....

LOL

Alex

Vladimir

I agree that what you propose can be done if the migration is flawless.

The problem is when the Owner recalculates the schedule by his own and questions the difference.

It is usually required here to submit the electronic file along with the printed reports.

Also somme reports that run after the recalculation are required. Believe me it is not easy to get away with the use of other software.

Best regards,
Rafael

Rafael,
exporting the schedule (and budget) means that you will not recalculate it. This is like creating special report. To be sure that nothing will be changed apply must dates. So the schedule in P6 database will be the same and presenting it on the Web is P6 function. Of course export means that some software specific information will be lost but P6 user will not notice it because P6 just does not have corresponding fields.
The Owner may require to present the schedule in the certain format. It is not his business how the schedule was created. If using Spider Project can help the Contractor to save a lot of money then why not?

Vladimir:
Migrating to a new software is not easy task. One must put own effort into migration process. How do you convince an owner to make an effort (in time and money) to migrate?
On the other hand, if I migrate to a new tool is because the new tool has features the old tool doesn’t have. Power Project can export files to and from Primavera, but it can be the case Primavera can’t manage some of the features from an imported Power Project file. Then, what’s the point in buying a new tool if you can’t use it to its max, being limited to the contractors’ tool?

Vladimir,

If I were free to make my choice I would do what you suggest. Unfortunately CPM is no longer a true project management tool but also a claim tool, therefore the Owner asks for his choice, not yours, it is a contractual requirement.

I agree with your assessment that it should be the Contractor’s choice, in practice this is not how it works. He who has the money makes the rules, the Owner.

Some use the schedule to plan. Some use it to control. Some use it to bargain and negotiate. Some use it to ridicule, while others use it to defend. Some use it to manage. Some use it to monitor. One schedule cannot achieve all of these various ends with equal effectiveness. In fact, the route to some ends is mutually exclusive. As you head in one direction, you distance yourself from another destination.
From: Faster Construction Jobs with CPM Scheduling by Murray B. Wolf

You have no idea of how much I crusade for this practice to be discontinued, but it fits Primavera and a few who have a vested interest. Meanwhile this mutt dog must follow the pack.

If I were into house building I would choose PP, I would be able to print schedule layouts at full drawing size to be posted at the jobsite using a single page for every 10 pages other software would require, at an easier to follow layout for free.

Primavera started with P3 an excellent product at its time, now is showing its age, then they followed with SureTrak. On the other hand I consider P6 a piece of garbage for those who do not need an Enterprise solution. Maybe I will end up swallowing this sour candy, who knows. I hope Owners and Construction Contractors will show some common sense at the end and pick up something else, whatever must be better.

Ironically, for the moment, our product of choice is Primavera SureTrak.

Best regards,
Rafael

Rafael,
you wrote that you gave up PP because it is not known here. So what? If the software has real advantages and can export projects to other programs for communications then what prevents to use it? If it can help to create better plans then why do you prefer to use those tools that are not saticfactory only because other people use them?
Please explain,
Regards,
Vladimir

Mike,

I am waiting for their e-mail regarding a demo I asked. Meanwhile I am exploring their site.

It is good to find true functionality improvements to the already available fields. I do not need hundreds of additional database fields like P6 is, just a few. Isn’t it enough? More fields means someone will ask you to populate them making you waste unnecessary time and maybe lose perspective by taking away time for analysis on what really matters.

I always asked for better ways to filter relevant data, filter for out-of-sequence, lag and relationship types, a functionality never availabe under P3, among a few others. Poweproject is providing some.

At a schedule update review, with limited time and a PM hurrying you these filters are a blessing. I was a PM for many years, now I am not; I provide services to them and understand how tight of time they always are.

The original developers of P3 could have made it twice as good as Powerproject, but they did not, they are gone and PowerProject is ahead. Everyone, long ago knew P3 was due for an upgrade that never came and even published their own wish list.

By the way, what about PERT/PDM views in PowerProject, I never print the whole diagram but portions of it are very useful.

Best regards,
Rafael

Rafael,
you can do the same trip on foot. Project Management is older than computers and even cars.
Best Regards,
Vladimir

Hi Mike

"The only problem is that the infinite variety of Powerproject calendars and resources are lost in the transfer back"

That’s my point: You can get all excited with improved functionality from PowerProject, then export your schedule to P6 and everyting what looked shiny in PowerProject becomes dull and unreadable in P6. Then, PowerProject becomes the likes of a Ferrari with an engine restricted to 60 mph.

Anyway, the conclussion I reach is: For me to start a scheduling career, maybe the adequate tool to buy is PowerProject.

Vladimir

At times you want to force some sequence that is not a true dependency but to account for some resource limitation or a sequence you want to control and not allow the software to do so. When things go sour and your job start to fall behind, then you might want to identify these and release them. I know how good you consider resource leveling under Spider Project but I still wonder what will happen to your resource leveling as the schedule is updated, will it keep course or will change course in search for the “optimum”?

What about the clutter you get into the bar chart when all dependencies are shown, in occasions you want to concentrate with driving relationships. Of course we all know driving relationships are dynamic as well as the critical path might be. Any change when compressing the network you will notice immediately and will keep you in focus on the new driving predecessor. Because of the clutter I usually turn off the graphic display and use the tabular display, equivalent but not as intuitive, a combination of both even better.

These are refinements P3 does not have; obviously the most important are covered even under 1970’s outdated software.

P3 is showing its age.

I am not saying Powerproject is perfect, not sure about PERT or PDM views, usefull to communicate and review relationships as long as you dont print out the whole schedule.

Best regards,
Rafael

Powerproject 10

Link types, this is my idea!!!, you have no idea how useful this can be.

Control on link display other than on and off, no other has it as they do not have link types or option to control on displaying driving/non-driving relationships, avoids clutter and provides understanding.

These are simple and practical things, why do I need P6 with 2000 field database with no such functionality? P3 upgrade, long overdue, never happened.

Ahgg, ##11xx&##, we are far behind.

Seems like the UK has it solved with PowerProject, but we don’t, yet.

US automakers did not listened what the world markets were asking until Toyota and Honda took over, now it is too late, the same will happen to Primavera/Oracle, maybe SAP from Germany and PowerProject from the UK will take over.

If PowerProject is a better product, then welcome.

PowerProject looks way better than P6, but I (sadly) know that I wouldn’t be able to use it in a real job since everyone else is using Primavera or Project, and it would come with compatibility issues sooner or later.

So, I second Rafael’s opinion regarding PowerProject’s marketing guys. Bring it here, to Mexico!

Best Regards,

Carlos.

Mike,

I ventured into PowerProject site. Seems like superb, a good one to fill the gap when Primavera stopped developing P3.

Among other things in favor of PowerProject is the way it handles Baselines, maybe not as good as P3 but close and better than any other. I also would like to see in detail how it handles multiple activities under the same bar, good for housing and multistory buildings, something I have never seen before, this is a very good one indeed. Buffers are another one I would use in a simplified way, but good to have if you want to use it at full functionality. And what about the Enterprise option that can export licensing to jobsite laptops, seems like Workstation and Enterprise versions are fully compatible.

But what happens with their marketing guys that do not move out of their comfort zone? Don’t let P6 take over, it is now or never.

Cordially,
Rafael

Mike,

What are you using? Same as NASA? I suppose it is not a neighborhood/regional thing, but something with worldwide acceptance, with representatives to provide onsite assistance anywhere in USA and its territories, South Africa, Japan, the Philippines, anywhere not a regional thing.

By the way how would you label P6?

Best regards,
Rafael

For the needs of the average contractor, less tha 100,000 activities per job,
even an Exactus Mini-Add would be better than P6.

Best regards
Rafael

P3 is excellent but is losing some functionality, among others full integration with Outlook 2007. Eventually it might not even work under the upcoming operating systems. I hate to admit P3 is close to becoming obsolete.

P6 and whatever Enterprise Software there is on the market is not the appropriate tool for the average General Contractors or a mere 98% of the industry. As a matter of fact Enterprise Applications has been available for decades for the Aerospace and Oil Industries. Because P6 compared to other Enterprise Software is cheap in all aspects, cost and quality, it might find a place at the Utilities that cannot afford the cost of a good Enterprise Application.

For the few in true need of an Enterprise Application; Integrating SAP with P6, a product that every other month comes with a service pack or an upgrade to solve about 40 bugs at a time does not makes any sense. I wonder how these upgrades affects the database and it’s integration with SAP, maybe it is that integration is a piece of cake.

I am migrating from P6 to P3. How ironic.

So if 2010 is any fixed date to go by, let’s hope that by then Primavera incorporate all the functionalities of P3 in its forthcoming versions. It is not there in P6. So let’s hope P7 (whenever it comes) incaptulate all the good old functionalities of P3.

One can appreciate that P3 started as a really powerful tool. And this power has not changed much from its DOS days - a lot of functionalities even in P5 looks the similar as it used to do in DOS days. It is mainly the graphics and reporting that has been added in subsequent releases. UNDO was the main function added in P5 compared to earlier version.

This posting started when someone had just installed P5 and "EUREKA" he shouts as if he has just discovered the project management solution. The subsequent postings merely show how that was not the case. More you use, more you will know about about its limitations and plus points. Having used P3ec all through Versions 3.5, 4 and 5 for past three years, I appreciate the power of P5. (and also limitations). Interestingly P3 is better in the same area where P5 is week. And despite several suggestions to Primavera about it, they did not implement those in version 4 or version 5 (P5). And in fact they have not implemented those even in recently announced P6 which is web based programme.

When asked about it, Primavera said that they are now working in this area as a priority basis but did not give any time frame.

Anyway the point I want to make is that it is not the software alone that makes you "Up to Date". You or your method can be obsolete if you do not take the full picture into view.

Charlie

No, you have not interpreted correctly what I am trying to say, and as you cannot spell my name maybe you didn’t read it properly anyway.

Despite the contradiction in your reply, you make a point in saying that ’planning using P3 is only one of the many tools use (sic) by project managers to drive the project team to achieve project goals’.

Surely the point of the programme is to provide a basis for monitoring progress against a baseline produced at a given moment in time, to help the management of the project (including the planner) to adapt to the ever changing circumstances surrounding the project in order to achieve project completion? Using proper planning software rather than PM reporting software surely makes this easier and more efficient.

Always remembering, of course that the planner utilises the software to enhance his/her skills; the ability to use the software doesn’t necessarily make one a planner!

I agree with Amreshwar Shukla entirely.

I don’t know either why Primavera decided not to continue P3. I reviewed P3e/c with them in 2003 and told them they had reverted to where they had been 5 years previously, they were not happy. Even the output then was designed to look the same as MS Project output, with the same limitations.

No, they don’t appear to listen.

Basically P3 is a Planner’s tool, and p5 (P3e/c etc) is a Manager’s reporting tool, and we all know where Planner’s sit in the management heirarchy!!

Dear Ulysses & Anoon

I am not agreeing with both of YOU. P3 was a great tool for many years and can be great tool for many more coming years if it incorporates the following changes-

1.Convert the software to 32bit.
2.Change the backend database from betrive to other better option.
3.Change the way in which WBS are being made and updated ( can borrow the usability from P5)
4.Change the way in which Resources are being assigned and updated to activities.
5.Close association with Ms Office for better reporting purpose.
Remember that P5 and P3 are for different audience and both were serving to them in last several years nicely. Only Primavera can tells us why they are converging to one. Are they listening????
Garcia- being a follower of PMI for many years, I can assure you that P3 can full all the obligation of PMBOK.
LONG LIVE P3

Regards,
A.S.Shukla.
Shukla@myrealbox.com

The other point with P5 (and now P6) is that though they are scaleable product, the whole software structure has become too big. P5 requires database server and P6 will rquire a client server. One may argue that you can still install it in your laptop. Sure it can. But then what’s the use of having a standalone version if most of the new features actually are for network.

P5 (and P6) are good centrilised systems and works really good in such environment. But as for planning, the ground reality is that projects are all different to each other and with very litte or no relationship between those projects at all. P3 is the best solution in all such situations. Of course, P3 could have been improved further, but instead they started running a paralllet software as enterprise version. And so far there has not been any sign of convergence of those two.

And as for support - I may not be wrong if I say these days Planning Planet provides more support for P3 thatn Primavera.

i think p3 will still be around even though there will be P6 - P(infinity).It has the feature of basic planning which most young planner need to know.For P5 user, you may find P3 "obsolete" but remember that it is the knowledge you got from P3 that makes you appreciate and learned P5 fast.

Nonetheless, the market will determine the future of P3.There are still companies, even MANAGERS do not know the benefit of using P3, how much more P5.

Some PROJECT CONSULTANT requires project schedules to be done in PRIMAVERA.After you made them, they look afterwardskeep it in their shelves.

I find P5 very helpul in monitoring purposes, but when it comes to planning & TIA, P3 is still the best.

Log Live P3!

And I can guarantee even the release of P6 next month will not be able to keep P3 to rest. The multi project functionality has still not been incorporated in P6. So definitely long live P3.

P3 is still strong with the planning communities because you can get more, then what you required as a planner. Except initial steep learning curve this software is still best among all other software’s available in the market. Peoples who swear by P5 can do anything of following in P5 -
1. Production of graphical reports.
2. Production of great banana curve from late & early data (graphical or otherwise).
3. Actual expenses and remaining cost curves as one curve ( they are now being shown differently in P5 and confusing).

LONG LIVE P3

Regards,

if P3 would be obsolete, so is Planning!

Long Live P3 - for as long as you can continue to use Windows XP.

And P3 may not be supported, but it is still too far from being obsolete. I have been using enterprise version of Primavera (starting with P3e Ver 4 and then Ver 5 for past three years). Agreed it is powerful and it has got new features which P3 did not have. But it also dropped some very user friendly features like working in multiple projects in different layouts etc. For these and many other reasons, P3 is still live and will keep on going.