View Full Version : Differences between OneSpace Manager and Model Manager

07-20-2005, 12:10 AM
Differences between OneSpace Manager and Model Manager ?????

08-24-2005, 07:47 AM
OneSpace Manager is the database server - Offical name is the CoCreate OneSpace Manager Server.
CoCreate OneSpace Model Manager is the integrated client to our 3D CAD system, CoCreate OneSpace Modeling.

I'm assuming that was your question?

If your question was, "What's difference between WorkManager (Desktop or Design Data Management) and Model Manager?", that can be answered in with three easy benefit statements:

1. Model Manager is integrated inside Modeling
2. Model Manager has database integrity checks
3. Model Manager has an updated Windows interface

Watch a webcast on CoCreate OneSpace Model Manager. (http://www.cocreate.com/webcast/)

PM Arnaiz
09-15-2005, 05:50 AM
We do already use Workmanager (14 users).

Has any of you changed from WM to MM? How much time did you need to do the change? And money?

I am being suggested by my VAR to make the change, but it seems to me it would be very expensive and time consuming.

-We are asked to pay for the change of the old WM licenses to MM licenses, even when we are paying for the maintenance of them. (The last ones we have bought are valid for both).

-Then, our VAR has to translate our customizations to MM.
-We must validate the customization.
-Translate the database from WM to MM
-I have to learn to use the new program (Very different interface)
-We must update all the clients
-We have to teach the users this new program

As I have said it seems to be expensive and time consuming.
Your experience?????

We are satisfied with WM, but for the last years it has not had any improvement, what is worse, the last versions donīt work properly, and we are still using v11.6 as we are having problems with the newest ones. They have lost some funcionalities (they are there but donīt work: try to assign a part manualy). We are paying the maintenance fee but there is no improvement, and I MM seems to be a better product, but....

So we canīt upgrade Modeling, too. (I also pay maintenance fee for this)

We are asked to go to MM, but paying again. Isnīt it too much?

Is it not MM a evolution of WM that should have been included in our maintenance fee?

Iīm quite angry with this affair.

tom kirkman
09-15-2005, 06:34 AM
I understand the anger and frustration with CoCreate on the ModelManager upgrade. Basically they are no longer supporting workmanager, but then ask us to pay more to upgrade to the product they do support. This begs the questions, "what happens when they upgrade to a newer package than ModelManager?" and "what will keep them from ending support on one package to make us pay for another?" Not too brilliant on marketing.

However; we did bite the bullet, payed for changes and switched from WorkManger to ModelManager. ModelManager is far easier to use than WorkManager. I suggest that you use ModelManager out of the box. This may cause you to have to change some things in your existing database. For example if you are using classes that are not standard, you will want to change these.

ModelManager is quick, easy to use and training takes less than 15 minutes.


May Kung
09-16-2005, 08:58 AM
We had similar concerns when we were deciding between continuing on Work Manager 5.1 or to pay to convert over to Model Manager. In spite of the upfront costs and other headaches associated with the project, I think it's well worth the pain. For one thing, Model Manager is much, MUCH easier to use. Users take less time to pick it up, plus you can do much more with it. Bi-directional communication between database and client means folks know immediately when a particular file is changed or if an update is available.

Also, customizations are largely done in XML. If need be, you can do these yourself. The old WM system was written in macro language, while MM run on Java. This means anything you can't customize with XML you can customize with Java.

If you decide to take the plunge, I agree with Tom about fixing non-standard classes first. We ended up chasing our tail because of some customized classes that carried over from our VDS setup. We also had a lot of other stuff that VDS customzed for us which caused no end of problems on the MM schema; it took a while, but we eventually worked it all out.

I'd also recommend you sit down ahead of time and map out your release process (naming convention, reserving/unreserve protocol, etc.) so you can check that your ACL's are set appropriately. It's much easier to test things.

09-16-2005, 10:28 AM
You guys are talking about WM, but are any of you using Design Data Manager or Desktop as a front end?


tom kirkman
09-19-2005, 04:57 AM
My understanding is that ModelManager was an improved replacement for Design Data Managment.

From what I was told, going from Design Data Management to ModelManager is much easier than going to it from WorkMangler oops Manager.

Thom Ivancso
09-19-2005, 05:18 AM
Hello All,

My understanding is that Model Manager / Drawing Manager are newer user interfaces and schemas, that are to replace the old Desktop and Design Data Management users interfaces and schemas.

WorkManager Server is still the same as it has always been only enhanced to allow the use of the newer user interfaces, schemas and programming languages.

These newer interfaces and schemas use a combination of XML and Java programing languages for configuration and customizations replacing the older macro style language.

Design Data Management is still available and functional under the 13.20A product structure, but I imagine will be removed at some future time.


09-19-2005, 05:18 AM
Going from Design Data Manager to Model Manager is expensive.
I am interested in hearing what your experiences are w/ Design Data Manager.
We have the licenses but have not used them to manage our 3D data. We are moving into 3D management and trying to determine if MM is necessary or if we can do the same job w/ DDM.


09-20-2005, 11:34 AM
We recently (a year ago or less it seems) migrated from Work Manager on an Allbase Database to Model Manager on top of an Oracle Database.

The primary motivation for doing this, from my perspective, was that WM/Allbase was no longer a supported configuration. As you may know, running unsupported configurations of mission-critical applications is dangerous. Basically you are potentially one software or hardware upgrade away from disaster and your vendor saying, "Sorry, you are running an unsupported configuration." That's not to say that CoCreate would do that to you, but the path of less risk is to always go with a vendor's supported configuration, so that if you run into problems, you can get help. So we had a good reason to move.

On top of that, Model Manager is a far superior PDM system than Work Manager. You will find that it has a very similar "flavor" - you still have "parts" (now "masterdata), and you still have "documents", but the interface to manage and create them is far superior to what it was in Work Manager. On top of that, it is far far easier to see and understand the relationships between models, assemblies, and drawings from within Model Manager.

The upgrade is expensive. But if you are committed to using CoCreate as a CAD tool, the value added by the new PDM system is worth it.


Thom Ivancso
09-20-2005, 11:52 AM


09-20-2005, 11:57 AM


09-21-2005, 06:39 AM
Again huh?
Want to explain?
Im interested.