Re: [foxboro] FW: Anybody Using IACC??

Regarding the comment about Archestra.  I understand the perception, but I
would like to offer a couple of examples of how Archestra is being used for
IA customers.  There are of course a number of developments in progress,
many focused on engineering tools and HMI capability.  More specifically we
are installing a fleet optimization application for a large power customer
and a new method for optimizing a combined heat and power provider.  Last
year we installed an application for dispatch for a multi-state utility
operating in a very controversial market.

Thanks
Tom Szudajski
Director, Invensys Global Power Marketing
H 602-867-8428
C 602-363-9392


-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 11:21 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] FW: Anybody Using IACC??

Joe,
        Thanks for posting your concern about the Wonderware HMI and
Archestra development.  It is very valid and we have a lot of concern about
that also.  You are right about the Foxbatch development snafu and we don't
want to see that happen again.  The situation is a little different with
Wonderware and Foxboro but the same thing could happen if Invensys sold
Wonderware or Foxboro to seperate companies.  
        Wonderware seems to be the only Invensys company really driving
Archestra, and although Foxboro is giving Archestra a lot of lip service, it
isn't obvious to most users that they are making real progress in the
development of new applications that use it.  (This is an open door comment
for Foxboro development folks to respond to).  Wonderware's interest in
Archestra is obvious because it could position their HMI, (InTouch), if a
large number of vendors bought in to that framework.  However, if they can't
even get backing from the companies under the Invensys umbrella such as
Foxboro, Triconex, Esscor/SimSci, then what good will it be.  
        I would personally like to see Foxboro's HMI move toward a browser
because of the browsers flexibility in displaying data from multiple systems
and data sources at the same time on a single display screen, and because it
can be served to anyone without them needing to know where the data servers
are located.  The browser gained rapid acceptance throughout the world
because of those strengths.  I would love to see Foxboro concentrate efforts
on getting all of their process control information into relational SQL
databases that are dynamic and virtually realtime so all of that data can be
accessed via browser based structured queries when needed.  If done right,
the browser and database structures would be platform independent and that
would allow users the choice of what operating system to use, (UNIX, MS
Windows, etc...)
        I received several good responses to my original question "Anybody
Using IACC?" from list members.  Most were sent directly to me instead of
the entire list.  I won't post them because the authors may not approve, but
I encourage those people to resend those to the whole list to stimulate
ongoing discussion and be a testimony to what users are really thinking
about the issue.

Thanks for your opinion,
Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY   USA

-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Joseph M. Riccardi
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 11:33 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Anybody Using IACC??


List,

My concern about the big picture (HMI and Archestra development) and the
future "Invensys Corporate" direction has always been ... What if the
Corporate tie between Foxboro and Wonderware is severed (i.e., one or =
the
other, or both, is sold off)?  Didn't a similar scenario impact the =
FoxBatch
II development?

Or is this not the time and place for "What ifs"?  If not, I apologize =
and
withdraw my concern ...

Joseph M. Riccardi
DCS Services - Industrial Process Control
=20
Joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
"To give real service you must add something that cannot be bought or
measured with money; and that is sincerity and integrity." - Donald A. =
Adams


-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =
On
Behalf Of tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 11:16 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] Anybody Using IACC??


Hi List,
        We are trying to evaluate if Foxboro's movement toward Microsoft
Servers and applications are being embraced by the user community at =
large,
or if they are mostly being purchased and installed at new sites with no
installed base of UNIX Servers/applications.  We have a lot of concerns
about the robustness and security of the Microsoft offerings.  The =
recent
warnings issued by both Foxboro and Wonderware concerning problems =
related
with installing Microsofts XP Service Pack 2 have only increased our
concerns for the future of IA on NT/XP/Server2003....

a.      "Wonderware recommends customers DO NOT install SP2 for Windows XP
until SP2 is fully supported by Wonderware. Some Wonderware FactorySuite
applications may stop working if this XP service pack is installed."

b.      "We have determined that a loss of I/A Series functionality can
occur after loading and applying Windows XP Service Pack 2. =
Additionally,
I/A Series software will not load correctly on a machine that has =
Windows XP
Service Pack 2 applied to the machine prior to the installation of I/A
Series software. "

        If an operating system has so many holes and security risks that it
requires continual updates via Service Pack releases, it may not be =
suited
for use in highly critical applications such as our DCS.  It wouldn't be
much of a concern to us if the Service Pack installations didn't cause =
loss
of functionality of applications that worked before, but this is a =
classic
case of the tail wagging the dog.  Because of Microsoft's mechanism to
automatically install updates on Windows machines, the users could lose
access without even knowing why.  This now puts the onus on Wonderware,
Foxboro, and the user community to expend special efforts to keep =
Microsoft
from shooting them in the foot.

        We purchased two AW-XP's because Foxboro told us that the future of
all IA configuration efforts will be advanced by new applications that =
will
run only on the MS platform.  The current Integrated Control =
Configurator
development will not progress, and any new functionality will only be
implemented in IACC.  FoxDraw and IACC have a special relationship that =
also
moves the Display building and configuration toward "MS only" =
functionality.
It is yet to be understood how WonderWare's "InTouch" HMI will be
incorporated into the mix but it is sure to be done in an MS environment
because the entire Archestra platform is entirely MS based.  This brings =
me
to the question in the subject line: "Is anybody out there using IACC as =
a
replacement for the ICC?"

        We used the ability of the XP-AW's to run ModbusTCP and OPC IOgates,
as cost justification to purchase the XP AW's.  Needless to say,
implementing them is something far short of seamless and running =
multiple
gates simultaneously on NT didn't mean that you could do it on XP.  Who
knew?  Apparently no one at Foxboro.  Although Foxboro keeps saying that =
the
user community dictated the move to an MS environment, it is more likely
that they wanted to move in that direction due to a large installed base =
of
existing applications coupled with more MS application programmer
availability.  Corporate managers that have more MS experience because =
they
use it on their desktop were also enthusiastic, so the move to MS =
appeared
to make sense.  However, many of the folks charged with maintaining and
securing these critical systems have been less than enthusiastic about =
the
move to MS.
        It is hard to tell if they know the UNIX based systems and are just
resistant to change or if the MS systems really have all of the problems
that they are pointing out but nobody else is listening.  I am =
soliciting
feedback from all users about thier experiences with Foxboro's MS =
offerings.
Please try to make objective comments and keep the passion from rising =
to
the top. It would be great if we received input from MS Only Foxboro =
users
as well as UNIX to MS transition experiences.
        We have already captured many of our experiences in a Word document
that I will be glad to email to those that request it, (off-list of =
course),
but I am interested in getting unique feedback that isn't influenced by =
any
of our experiences to begin with.  Thanks for anything you can =
contribute to
this thread!

Let the Games Begin,

Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY   USA=20
=20
=20
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at =
your
own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
=20
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Djoin
to unsubscribe:      =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
=20



 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
 
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
 
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts: