This list is not correct, and it is missing a lot of information on Oracle solutions that have been released for years and all available in public documents…
Aras has:
-No Analytics
-No ERP integrations out of the box
-No Data Quality engine
-No Enterprise Architecture (clustering, etc)
-A sub standard security model
You refer to “hard coded customizations” as being a bad thing, but that’s EXACTLY what a customer needs to do to deploy Aras!
The Aras toolkit is good, and the Aras data model is, in fact, very flexible. The customers can create whatever they want. This is NOT A GOOD THING. If a customer wants to be in the software development business, then they will LOVE Aras. If they want a PLM application up and running fast with a proven track record of success, Aras is not what they are looking for.
PLM Expert – Thanks for your comments. Sounds like you could use an update on the Aras technology given some of the inaccuracies in your post. Thought I’d try to help out here (better late than never…)
- Aras does have analytics, in fact in addition to the full suite of Microsoft business intelligence capabilities, the open architecture means that you can use any other analytics product that you want, your choice
- There are a whole series of OOTB ERP integrations
- Aras is an enterprise architecture with clustering capabilities, etc.
- The architecture of Aras makes it easy to use subsidiary applications like Data Quality (even Oracle’s), while the Oracle strategy makes those offerings proprietary and expensive.
- The security model comment is clearly a misstatement; Aras has a very robust military-grade security structure with ‘need-to-know’ permissions based on groups and roles with hierarchical inheritance... in addition, Aras has Team-based security which Agile does not.
- The last comment on hardcoded vs. flexibility also seems misdirected. The Aras model-based SOA framework allows tailoring to fit business processes without complex programming, and those customizations are supported through upgrades. The reason for Agile's success is that since the data model is hardcoded, customers are generally forced to change their business to match the software. While this can get customer up and running quickly, it stifles process-based innovation and presents a particular problem when business requirements change such as new market conditions, customer demands, acquisitions, etc. With a hard coded system you are unable to improve your business. Aras solves this issue by providing complete OOTB functionality that is highly flexible so you can get going fast, and customize your processes quickly as well to take advantage of opportunities. After all, isn’t that what companies really need?
John Sperling,
First full disclosure: You and I both used to work at Agile Software together before it got acquired by Oracle.
I don't have any incentive to defend Agile (I left a while ago) except that I think some intellectual honesty is required here.
Even when taking into account that this article was written in 2009, it contains a lot of inaccuracies and omissions that you can clear up for Aras. By the way, this not only goes for you but for all of the ex Agile people working at Aras. You know who you are.
A couple of examples:
- Many projects never finish. You and I both know this is not true. Agile's customer satisfaction is extremely high.
- Limited set of objects. You forget all objects and roles related to Cost Management (Customer, Supplier, Quote, Price, ...) or all objects related to Product Quality (CAPA, product change request, quality data mart) or Product Compliance (Specifications, Declaration, Substance) etc.
I think it would help Aras' credibility tremendously when it creates a true comparison. As a PLM professional well connected in this space, I know statements like this make Aras look like an untrustworthy partner.
XAgile