Re: [foxboro] IACC TO FCS
- From: "Brazell, Troy L" <TLBrazell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:47:30 +0000
Tadeo,
I don't like the way that FCS is coupled to IA. I really like being able to
import my graphics and configure them from the IACC. We also have built an
extensive set of symbols that allow us to drag and drop from with in the IACC
onto graphics.
I just hate to see Invensys prostitute them selves to Wonderware!!!
With the lack of support from Wonderware, I am considering moving away from IA.
I just can not justify the incremental cost of going to FCS!!! The cost is
crazy (it is going to cost an additional $32000)and does not buy us anything.
Our plants are typically less than 400 IO and we are able to easily bulk
generate from IACC to catch the majority of our loops. I can see where FCS
MIGHT have an advantage for very large systems, but it is just not worth the
extra cost to us!
Wonderware's business model is not the customer friendly model that Foxboro was
built on, after all they only sell software so like Microsoft to continue to
generate revenue they have to obsolete software and force customers to buy
expensive upgrades so that they can sell more software.
Sorry, but you are going to have a very hard time convincing me that FCS is
worth the additional cost that we will be paying. The DCS / PLC market is
getting very competitive and Wonderware is only adding to the cost that I have
to justify to our management team. It has been an uphill battle to keep IA on
the front burner and I don't know how much longer I can keep it as an option
with increased pricing thank to Wonderware.
Troy Brazell
Engineer Project Lead
ISA CCST
Corporate Automation/Chief Corporate Office
DCP Midstream
Office Phone 405.605.3877
Mobile Phone 405.301.2994
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tadeo Armenta
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 1:25 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] IACC TO FCS
Hello Tom/Troy,
As every product in the market, it does not suit all the needs for a particular
client and it has more than another client might need.
For example, from a I/A 8.4.3 FV with IACC, if you are not interested in doing
a lot of engineering, dont need to add a lot of points, a new plc or something
like that, FCS will have the same difference as an Iphone 5 to an Iphone 4s.
Its just more expensive and bigger and a slightly prettier interface. With
IACC you have what you probably needed, CSDs, templates, graphic conections,
etc.
But if you have an older system and plan a big upgrade or plan to add new units
to your system. IEE is the way to go.
First because of what we already know, IACC will be supported till 2016. But
even if it werent the case.
IEE provides a much more powerfull engineering environment. It has what you
loved since you moved from ICC to IACC, but better. Plus it changes totally the
way of managing bulk data generation, which in my opinion in IACC was a pain in
the ass.
It changes your philosophy and that is the main concern for some people. You
rely on your Galaxy Repository instead, leaving your hosts in a less demanding
role. Database is SQL, search, filter, the database manipulation through
DirectAccess after you learn how to do it, you learn is awesome. You can build
or modify huge databases for gateways in a matter of hours, and that, in
commissioning stage is a big plus for the configuration engineer.
I dont know how will it be in 4.0, but the sysdef configuration embedded on IEE
is way more friendly than System Definition software, I never used a commit
disk from IEE however.
You forget about workfiles!, so if you are an iccdrvr task junkie, you'll miss
it. If not, you wont miss having to care about workfiles database...
corruption, outdate, and other fun problems that come with it.
Galaxy Repository is just one more server, and it could be installed off mesh.
It has some other things such OPC comms (i didnt tried, but its suppossed to
save the OPC server licence). My one downside, is that validation and download
takes longer (an i mean longer!) than IACC, and lets not talk about ICC, but
its manageable once you get used to it.
So again, it depends on what you think you are looking for, and what you really
need. Dont buy an Iphone 5 if you have already have 4s, specially if you only
use it for tweeting and playing angry birds ;)
Hope it helps,
Regards
________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
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: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
