PTC Windchill RV&S

Formerly Integrity Lifecycle Manager

We enjoy doing requirement mappings. The enhancement in transferring them between models is great. It is for innovation all the time a challenge to conduct them. We have two major scenarios for that task set. One is to integrate already well-validated models into greater sets. The other is defining totally new ones. We developed new strategies and refined the existing ones. We rate the synching requirement configurations as comfortable. The processes of synching the items back to the models. The major advantage is to optionally synchronize all-important and intended traceability relationships from Modeler so that both can be given the correct right the right group of uses while others only see the structures. We too prefer the handling of deletion and creation. It is a real advantage how the mapping and relation are implemented. The implemented integration to third-party tools for requirements definition and management is a plus. We like the profiling features and the high compliance to industrial standards as well as the module variability modeling.Windchill RV&S makes us perform better and let us take over control. It enhances our return-of-investment efficiencies to the top. The only drawbacks are the high skill levels needed and the necessary relation in businesses to make the profits. Another topic is the resources that are needed.

The product is ideal for big development firms with several software solutions being produced at various periods. It is most likely unsuitable and overkill for smaller enterprises.

PTC Integrity is an excellent source code management and version control tool, and I would suggest anyone to use it for that purpose. We can even define our workflows using individual forms for implementing Change Management, Defect Management and Access management requests. If properly used, this tool is great for managing our code for very long periods, considering my 4-5 years of usage.
Though the UI could be better, and integration with some application servers could be better implemented, this tool is a good tool.

PTC Integrity is well suited for requirement management.

I would say that PTC Integrity is very well suited to structured environments where traceability is critical.

Ican't think of any limitations but it was the best tool I have used so far.

What are you using now?
What are you spending currently for this type of software solution?
How could a tool of this nature be used by your company to save money lost due to poor or inefficient design?

The product is well suited for large development organizations that have multiple software solutions being developed at different intervals. It is probably less suited and an over-kill for smaller organizations. If your organization has a large development team, qa team, a business analyst/requirements gathering team and you want to ensure that all teams are working well together, this is the solution for your organization. I would recommend MKS Integrity over IBM's Clearcase/Clearquest.

Are all areas of the SDLC willing to use the same tool? If everyone is not going to use the tool, the group may not get all of the intended functionality out of Integrity.

I recommend the product because of the following reasons.
- Version Control Management
- Deployment is easy through the tool
- Single Repository for all the Documents, codes, deliverable.
- Easy to manage the Projects, Folders with in Projects.
- Ability to support multi users, multi projects, availability thru Citrix,
- Ability to create the new version of the same deliverable when edited which assures availability of the history of the deliverable.

1. Know the requirements for each team that will access the tool.
2. Have the tool representative talk to how each requirement can be addressed.
3. What other third part tools can PTC "talk to" (data transfer requirements)?
4. How can we transfer info (data, documents) to third party vendors or partners?

I would ask questions like: What is the size of the organization? What is the type of business? What is the problem you are trying to address using MKS?

Well despite some minor issues MKS was easy to use. There were mandatory fields that needed to filled out by the user which provided a good way to track detailed issues.

I would not recommend any one to use it.

1. Size of the team ?
2. Is there an offshore team as well ?
3. Are people okay with having a centralized server storing all the file information and history ?

This is very useful in organizations which handle multiple projects among several employees.