Sohodojo and Communities of the Future proudly host...
The Center for Community
M2: Analysis of Comparable Project Planning/Management Offerings
M2 Section Summary: System Constraints
Copyright (c) 2000 Jim Salmons and Frank Castellucci
All Rights Reserved
Associated project: Specification Writing for Web-based Project Planning Software
Project URL: http://sohodojo.com/techsig/project-planning-project.html
sXc Project detail: http://sourcexchange.com/ProjectDetail?projectID=24 (SourceXchange is out of business.)
Project coordination: Sohodojo
Sponsors: Position open
Sponsors (M1-3): Opendesk.com and Collab.Net
Core Team: Jim Salmons and Frank Castellucci
1 Introduction
This document aggregates the feature and underlying model analyses of comparable products and services in the domain of the project specification requirements. During the comparables analysis phase, nine product and service offerings were examined.
1.1 Format and Key to Abbreviations
Each of fourteen sections of the Comparables Analysis Data Capture Outline has a Section Summary file such as this one. Section 1 of each data collection form is an Introduction statement explaining the project and the assessment. Section 16 is a reviewer profile. Since all data was produced by the core project team members, section 16 does not have a summary section.
In a Section Summary file, we aggregate the analysis data within each subsection of the raw data collection forms. Each data point from the raw assessment outlines is presented in the following alphabetical order and prefixed with the following identifying abbreviations:
Note: The HTML versions of the deliverable use bullet lists with more readable prefix identifiers than the two-character source identifier used in the text versions.
The aggregated section data in each Section Summary file is the last section of the file. In addition to the aggregated data, each summary file has an optional section for the capture of summary insights or comments.
1.2 Section Summary Insights and/or Comments
====== SECTION SUMMARY DATA ======
3 System Constraints [ All assessments, this topic ]
3.1 Physical Limitations
Enact Enterprise System [ Full data ]
Not applicable.
eProject Express [ Full data ]
eProject Express is a web-based, real-time system requiring the user to be connected and interactive with the server.
The eProject Anywhere service to be rolled out this Fall will add wireless and enhanced mobile connections. Presumably this means that asynchronous 'download, detach, and merge updates' connection features will be enhanced. For now, it's basic browser-based direct connect.
FastTrack Schedule [ Full data ]
None to speak of... AEC supports electronic product purchase and delivery, on-line support, etc., so there are not 'physical access' barriers.
ManagePro [ Full data ]
Not applicable.
Microsoft Project 2000 and Project Central [ Full data ]
See next section
Opendesk.com [ Full data ]
Not applicable.
SourceForge [ Full data ]
System resources, MySQL limits.
WebProject [ Full data ]
Not applicable
X-Community [ Full data ]
X-Community is a web-based, real-time system that works best when users are connected and interactive with the server. There are import/export features that allow work to be performed in a disconnected mode. However, a full Business Center 'model state' cannot be captured locally and then synchronized with the server.
3.2 Software Limitations (operating systems, plug-ins, drivers)
Enact Enterprise System [ Full data ]
Enact System Requirements
Server
Minimum/Recommended Hardware:
124 MB RAM, 256 recommended
60 MB disk space, 1 GB recommended
Windows: Pentium II 300 MHz or higher
Sun: Ultrasparc 2 or higher
Supported Platforms:
Windows NT 4.0, with Service Pack 4, 5, or 6A
Sun Solaris 2.6 and 2.7, with the latest patches
Supported Web Servers:
Microsoft IIS 4.0 (NT)
Netscape iPlanet 3.0 or 4.0
Apache 1.X (Solaris)
Supported Databases:
Oracle 8.0.5 and 8.1.6
Microsoft SQL Server 7.0
Integrated Storage (flat file)
Supported LDAP Servers:
Netscape Directory Server 4.0 or 4.0.1
Eudora WorldMail Directory Server (included for NT)
University of Michigan LDAP Server (included for Solaris)
Required Software:
Perl, version 5.003, build 3.06
SMTP-based email system or
an SMTP-compliant gateway to the email system
(to enable email functions)
Browser Access Client
Minimum/Recommended Hardware :
64 MB RAM
ISDN or faster connection to the Enact Collaboration Server
Supported Platforms:
Windows 98
Windows NT 4.0, with Service Pack 4, 5, or 6A
Sun Solaris 2.6 and 2.7, with the latest patches
Supported Browsers:
Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 or 5.0
Netscape Navigator 4.5 or 4.7
Required Software:
Adobe Acrobat 3.0 or 4.0 (for printing)
Enact Desktop Client
Minimum/Recommended Hardware :
64 MB RAM
30 MB disk space (40 during install)
Supported Platforms:
Windows 98
Windows NT 4.0, with Service Pack 4, 5, or 6A
Sun Solaris 2.6 and 2.7, with the latest patches
Macintosh PowerMAC on MacOS 8.0 and , MRJ 2.1
Supported Browsers:
Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 or 5.0
Netscape Navigator 4.5 or 4.7Palm Task Integration
Palm OS 3.0 or higher device
JSync to use HotSync Manager on Windows (included)eProject Express [ Full data ]
The current Express service is 100% web-based, server-based interaction through a client web browser. It appears that the current service is in the HTML 3.2 level of portability. As with most things, however, having an up-to-date browser would help.
As a server-mediated interaction, you are at the mercy of connection speed. It was tolerable on a cable modem.
FastTrack Schedule [ Full data ]
No Unix, but most flavors of Windows and Macintosh are supported with relatively transparent file and feature compatibilities. (In some cases, such as host scripting, OS features are implemented differently while the functional contribution is comparable, as much as possible, between platforms.)
The multi-user collaboration features are generally implemented with a 'file-locking'-style interaction constraint.
A strong, built-in user licensing key system controls and facilitates multi-user licensed usage.
ManagePro [ Full data ]
There is no stated limits for the data entries in a ManagePro database.
Whether running in Solo or Teamware mode, the ManagePro desktop application can only open/access one database at a time. Since ManagePro is 'goal-based' rather than 'project-based', it is possible to have a single database which contains the data for multiple 'projects'. Alternatively, a user may maintain a separate database for each 'project' and switch between them as needed.
Microsoft Project 2000 and Project Central [ Full data ]
Microsoft Project 2000:
- Computer/Processor - PC with a Pentium 75 MHz or higher processor
- Hard Disk 30-204 MB of available hard-disk space (30 MB for typical installation on system running Windows NT Workstation 4.0 with Microsoft Office 2000 installed; 204 MB for full installation on similar system without Office 2000 installed.)
- Drive For Windows 95 or Windows 98: - 16 MB of RAM for the operating system, plus an additional 8 MB of RAM for Microsoft Project For Windows 2000 or Windows NT Workstation version 4.0 or later with Service Pack 3 or later: - 32 MB of RAM for the operating system, plus an additional 8 MB of RAM for Microsoft Project
- Operating System Microsoft Windows® 95, Windows 98, or Windows 2000 operating system, or Microsoft Windows NT® Workstation operating system version 4.0 or later with Service Pack 3 or later
Project Central Client:
- An additional 10-20 MB of available hard-disk space.
Microsoft Project Central Server:
A PC with same configuration as Project 2000, with these exceptions:- PC with Pentium 200 MHz or higher processor
- Windows 2000 Server or Windows NT Server version 4.0 with Service Pack 3 or later, and Windows NT 4.0 Option Pack
- At least 128 MB of RAM
- 100-150 MB of available hard-disk space
Miscellaneous
Additional items or services required to use certain features:- 9600 baud modem; 14,400 or higher-baud modem recommended
- Multimedia computer required to access sound and other multimedia effects
- Some Internet functionality may require Internet access and payment of a separate fee to a service provider
- Windows-compatible network and MAPI-compliant mail systems required for mail functions
- Windows NT 4.0 with Service Pack 3 or later,
- Internet Information Server 4.0
- SQL Server(tm) 7.0, Oracle 8.x, or shipped Microsoft Database Engine required for Web-enabled workgroup functions
- Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.01 or later or the shipped browser module for Microsoft Project Central required for Microsoft Project Central access.
Opendesk.com [ Full data ]
All of OpenDesk interactive modules are implemented as web pages with perl script applications. There are no plug-ins or drivers required by the client.
SourceForge [ Full data ]
Server: PHP, MySQL, Client: Web-browser
WebProject [ Full data ]
All of WebProject interactive modules are implemented as web pages or Java Server Pages (JSP), a Java Virtual Machine (JVM) is required.
X-Community [ Full data ]
Due to plug-in requirements, the current service REQUIRES a Windows-flavor OS and either a latest version Internet Explorer or Netscape browser with Java capabilities.
3.3 Implementation Limitations (number of projects, tasks per projects, users, roles)
Enact Enterprise System [ Full data ]
There were no stated limits.
eProject Express [ Full data ]
The current eProject Express service is 'ruthlessly simple'. It is obviously a clean and simple indicator of 'good things to come'. In other words, the Fall upgrade sounds like a near essential before you would want to use this for a real project of any complexity.
The current system is a 'Person/User'-centric. A Task can be assigned to only one Person.
There is a very limited sense of Roles, being Team Member and Project Manager roles. However, the assignment to either of these 'roles' has few implications in the current implementation. Team Members can create and 'manage' Projects. The Team Member's 'Person/User' Directory is limited to new entries he/she creates within this 'scope'.
The task-time granularity is 'daily'. There is no provision for time within a day in this release.
FastTrack Schedule [ Full data ]
FastTrack Schedule is an 'old guard' solution offering that has evolved through more than 10 years of continuous availability. It's 'design-point' has always been 'power with ease-of-use'. To that end, it has not tried to be 'everything to everybody'.
FTS is essentially 'project-centric' and 'project manager/planner' focused. That is not to say that over the years it has not developed sophisticated 'collaboration' and info sharing features. These interactive features are, however, designed within its original design-point.
For example, while Tasks are assumed/encouraged to have Manager assignments, there is no 'human resource' dimension to a FTS project. You cannot, for example, shorten a Task duration by 'doubling up' on Team Member assignments to a Task as there is no 'one to many' assignment of Team Members to a task. (A manager could, however, extend a project model to support such associations and to incorporate 'computed durations' into a project, but this is not directly supported to keep the 'complexity scope' within the design approach.
ManagePro [ Full data ]
While there is a _tremendous_ amount of configuration flexibility which can be used within a wide range of management styles, there is an underlying 'theme' to ManagePro. ManagePro is clearly 'goal-based' and 'people-oriented'. When used to full advantage, ManagePro encompasses project management, issue management, personnel development and performance appraisal functions.
For those who do not need or want all the personnel management bells and whistles, ManagePro configurations are easily set to 'slim down' the user interface to the essential goal, to do and people data elements.
If ManagePro misses anything, the database is highly configurable and allows the addition of user-defined fields.
Microsoft Project 2000 and Project Central [ Full data ]
System resources only.
Opendesk.com [ Full data ]
Not Applicable.
SourceForge [ Full data ]
Limited only by the underlying technology (system resources, MySQL, PHP)
WebProject [ Full data ]
Resource restricted.
X-Community [ Full data ]
Your pocketbook would appear to be the limit.
Technically in terms of project planning and management, the limits of the integrated MS Project features would be the complexity limitation. (See our MS Project assessment for related information.)
The current service offering 'defers' project planning and management to MS Project through X-Collaboration's strategic partnership with Microsoft as an ASP.
3.4 Does the software assume a specific project management methodology, if so which one(s)?
Enact Enterprise System [ Full data ]
The offering itself does not assume a particular methodology. A number of sample files are provided for instructional purposes and to be used as templates to generate 'starting point' new projects. These sample projects represent a variety of approaches to project management and organization consistent with the Enact platform.
eProject Express [ Full data ]
The 'Ruthless Simple' school.
FastTrack Schedule [ Full data ]
FTS does not support or require a specific project management methodology. However, the product's design constraints encourage a 'project-centric' approach (as opposed to a 'people-centric' approach like ManagePro) and a 'project planner/manager' user focus.
This focus was apparently selected for a 'core value' of 'ease of use' for its target user market. AEC has successfully avoided the 'grow by adding all things and the kitchen sink' to its feature-set. To its credit, AEC has found ways to add interactive 'teaming' features to FTS while still maintaining its 'project-centric/planner-centric' focus.
ManagePro [ Full data ]
While there is a _tremendous_ amount of configuration flexibility which can be used within a wide range of management styles, there is an underlying 'theme' to ManagePro. ManagePro is clearly 'goal-based' and 'people-oriented'. When used to full advantage, ManagePro encompasses project management, issue management, personnel development and performance appraisal functions.
For those who do not need or want all the personnel management bells and whistles, ManagePro configurations are easily set to 'slim down' the user interface to the essential goal, to do and people data elements.
If ManagePro misses anything, the database is highly configurable and allows the addition of user-defined fields.
Microsoft Project 2000 and Project Central [ Full data ]
While it does not assume a methodology throughout the system, there is a accept/deny/continue model (which can be disabled) and it does support programmatic extensions in all areas and events to enforce the business processing rules of an organization.
Opendesk.com [ Full data ]
Not Applicable.
SourceForge [ Full data ]
Not applicable.
WebProject [ Full data ]
The documentation suggests a methodology (although not which) should be considered to enhance the quality of the project. The only area that enforces a methodology is in the Project Proposal feature, which potentially requires an acceptance sign off before a project can be created.
X-Community [ Full data ]
Well, in the sense that it is dependent on MS Project for project planning and management facilities, X-Community reflects the 'typical usage' approach of MS Project.
Ignoring the relationship to MS Project for the moment and reflecting on the basic services, X-Community can be seen as a 'work product'-focused system rather than a 'people-centric' system. That is, Team member access and Task assignments can be added to items in the 'Business Center >> Workspace >> Notecard" hierarchy.
3.5 Reviewer Comments
Enact Enterprise System [ Full data ]
None
eProject Express [ Full data ]
As a placeholder for the roll-out of a future upgrade, it is very basic but very credible as far as it goes. These are the kind of basic HTML interfaces that we should shoot for in the platform to be developed based on the spec of this project.
FastTrack Schedule [ Full data ]
None
ManagePro [ Full data ]
None
Microsoft Project 2000 and Project Central [ Full data ]
The system requirements are very reasonable, but of course it is closed source and therefore not a "seed" potential.
Opendesk.com [ Full data ]
As a closed source system, OpenDesk can't be considered as a starting code base for open source initiatives.
SourceForge [ Full data ]
SourceForge is currently hosting 7,000 projects with 42,000 registered users. It is reasonably responsive on a 56k line. Scalability and performance with the addition of higher level functionality is unknown.
WebProject [ Full data ]
As a closed source system, WebProject can't be considered as a starting code base for open source initiatives.
X-Community [ Full data ]
By deferring the project planning and management features to MS Project, the X-Collaboration team has concentrated its initial modeling and implementation effort around 'shared access to clustered, organized and annotated work products'.
DOCUMENT HISTORY
Version 0.9 - Draft
Version 1.0 - Final
### end of sxc24-m2-02sect-comparables.txt (Version 1.0) ###
© 1998-2010 Jim Salmons and Timlynn Babitsky for Sohodojo except as noted for project deliverable and working documents.
Our Privacy Statement
"War College" of the Small Is Good Business Revolution
Website design and hosting by Sohodojo Business Services,
A Portfolio Life nanocorp
[ Support Sohodojo ]
[ Translate page ]
[ Search site ]
Community Collaboration Platform Project
Complaint? Irritation? Suggestion?
Tell us, please.