What is the biggest problem in P6

I agree to all your post



My biggest problem at the moment is the claim digger in P5.



I got lost, it is not user friendly, unlike before???



When claim digger is a stand alone software from P3.



My problem with the present claim digger is that the result is place in one sheet using .csv whereas before, the result is place in different sheet.



Will anyway, i’m off tangent, just letting off some steam, frustration due to Primavera thinking of advancement.

Thanks for your comments Joel. I do read and contribute to the Forum at times, although I confess that my reading of posts is not as often and extensive as I’d like. It’s the old story, w**k calls! Best of luck with solving your problem.

Hi Arthur,



If I was in SA I would have contacted you in a flash since I have dealt with you since 1989 with little problems. I am now in Brazil, which makes it difficult. I have someone on the case but it is taking time. I was also referring to when I was In China trying to negotiate a license for 15 network packages and advice and no-one even returned my mail and so the company lost interest and went to another package.



Thanks for the reply Arthur I am sure the Planners will be impressed that a Primavera supplier reads and keeps up with the forum. That is definitely a feather in South Africa Primavera agent/distributor’s cap.



The main Planners gripe that is not been passed on to Primavera marketing and design is that when you use a tool and it is working well, why change it completely? It puts huge pressure on the individuals using it. Management wants instant results and there is no space for training. Unless you are a permanent staff working in a huge company with huge training budgets.



The flip side of the coin is that Primavera has been opening a door for other softwares like PDM etc. to feed of Primavera and produce graphs, S curves, spreadsheet and all the standard practice documents that 3.1 use to produce in the standard package and now is a extra and without the complexity of Primavera.

Hi Joel. Re your error code. I don’t know what country you’re in at present, it doesn’t seem to be South Africa because there’s no record of your problem here. I don’t know why you’re still on P5 and not P6, but even if it’s P5 that error is easily fixed with the latest service pack. Assuming you’re still on maintenance, you can get the fix from your local support or get it yourself by logging onto the POINT system. That error code is also documented there.

what we really need in this forum is





AGREESIVE MARKETING by Vladimir of Spider



This planet really needs to take a hard look at what Spider can do, fucntionally and cost.



In this way this will send a stronge message to PRIMAVERA:





WE ARE NOT GULLIBLE.



Primavera Disciples and Apostles are always and will always be gullible individual.

Hi Joel,



That is one good thing to agreed about.



The worst sceanrio really are the disciples and apostles of Primavera.



This individuals follows Primavera blindly and they got that emotional high feelings that the new version P6 will give them undue advantage to lesser planners/planning engineers that they are branding them as inferiro to their own league.



Beleive me, I encounterede a P5 and P6 users that do not even know what the gantt chart generated by P5 and P6 what it is all about. A simple finish date generated after running a schedule was not captured and misrepresented



and YET, YOU KNOW WHAT...



The P5 / P6 user is strutting like a first class planner devoid of realism as to what the consequence of his actions has on the project.



A really dont believe this disciples and apostles who degenerated their arguments that "old planners dont want change"



It would be preferable that this Primavera disciples and apostles can really present a case as to the advantage of P5 vs P6 or P3 vs P5. In Primavera manuals, Primavera may say so and so.... blah blah blah...



But in really project situation???? DID IT REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE???????

Hi Charles,



I must agree with you there is nothing more frustrating than having to do your job with a tool that was easy to use and then having to learn another package, for the sake of a company wanting to make much more money on training.

In our industry `´ time is money´, so there is no time for training and when you contract management wants results.



Another gripe is the piss poor back up you get from the various country Primavera Branches, at least from the countries I have worked in.

At the moment I have waited one week for a problem in P5 network version where I cant copy or paste without a message coming up (TPETM-2301-E : Missing begin task) anyone knows the problem????



The problem is that there is not much competition for Primavera, and they know that.

The new released versions like P5 is becoming more and more time consuming when wanting to create a schedule from scratch and like previously mentioned now I cant even print a S curve showing Baseline vs Planned in man hours like we use to without having to download the info into excel.



If the businesses would put their foot down and planners would stand together this may have a impact. Unfortunately nothing we say and do will help the cause.

Without been branded with the (resistance to change, old timer planner, not staying ahead, logo.)



So we/ I just have to plod along and carry on possibly working with P16 by the time I go on pension.



It is good to read that some planners think like I do.



Joel

The biggest problem in P6 ...



Are the disciples and apostles of Primavera.



The disciples and apostles tend to know it all considering the new release of this version. Amen.



so in their high emotional state, they, the disciples and apostles of Primavera, tend to become missionary of Primavera proclaiming a new dawn in project planning is at hand and behold, their faith convince them that P6 is the ultimate solution to the problem in project planning. Amen.



It will only be a matter of time, that other planners not using P6 will be branded as heretics





I still believe, P3 and P5 will solve the problems related to project planning. Besides, a planner need courage in presenting his/her case to the project team members.



Cheers,

David,



That is one of the differences between engineers and jockeys, Engineers will apply decompositions and derivations to make things consistent in order to come up with a reliable calculation.



You are right, you can only calculate EV if you got a common unit, common unit - does not necessarily mean single resource. You can use various resources that relate to corresponding activities.



I always believe that any person can never do real planning unless he knows how to do the job or the work or by the aid of a mentor otherwise, he/she can only be a jockey.

hi

i got an interesting document about how to migrate from p3 to p6 it may help

http://www.primavera.com/customer/documents/P3toP6.pdf



friendly

Raf,



I spend about 50% of my time training. Now that I start to add up the P3e/p4/p5/p6 students I have had it must come to nearly a thousand engineers!



I have written several custom courses for Oil and Gas customers - you guys must be good, eight to one?





I have a LOT to say about my experiences - but right now I am under the cosh to get a huge integration software proposal out. That’s the other 50% of what our company does. Much as I would like to chew the fat I need to switch off planning planet for a week and just get my head down and type.



Couple of bullet points -



"Primavera Authorised" gets the course past corporate HR approval, even if drilling engineers don’t build offices the 102 course is what they think they need.



I fought hard with Primavera when they dropped the demo version of P3e. I still run 601 P3 3.1 courses, and every attendee can take the demo version away and practise. They ALL do - its invaluable. This is a huge hole in our armoury to keep what is learned on the course remembered.



I’ll be back...

Dear David Kelly



How right you are about the lack of training.



I am considering with Paul Harris (who has written a training manual on P4, P5 and P6, see www.eh.com.au) to try and establish a full a proper training course.



We are both very long time users and Planners and Schedulers.



I have been trying to get my head around a sensible cost to run such a course, where to locate it, or then for how long.

Proper training takes time.



In my teaching of Planning & Scheduling in a Masters degree of Construction Management at Melbourne University, I have one day per week for a full semester, ie 13 weeks.

(A Masters cost over $AUD110,000.00 and goes for three years)



Now Paul and I are in Australia



To make things pay (and you would really need a five day course), we need at least 25 to 30 attendees to do something worthwhile. But that is a lot of students, who would have to have a high degree of English language skills, otherwise (as I know from experience) the course will collapse.



The costs For Air Fares, Accommodation, Meals, our Time, the rent for a training location etc. Students would be expected to have their own copy of the software as well as computer.





My view of the world is that $UDS200.00 per day is the least it could be done for which is extremely cheap and should not be beyond anybody who is working as a P&S and uses PP as a knowledge gathering site



Remember every hour of teaching takes approximately eight to ten hours of preparation and we would have to protect our intellectual property.



One major sticking point is, as you well know, (if you have been following PP for years), is the constant complaint of having to pay for things.



If you have any ideas that would help, I would be most obliged.



Raf

Anoon,



The issue with EV at activity level is that you cannot calculate productivity by resource UNLESS each activity has only one resource.



If an activity was estimated at 100 manhours of Mechanical work and 100 manhours of electrical work.



You are 50% complete, that is achieved 50 hours of both disciplines.



You have expended 25 hours of mechanical time

You have expended 75 hours of electrical time



P6 can only show the productivity of the activity as 1.0



NOT productivity of mechanical as 50/25

AND productivity of electrical as 50/75



JUST productivity of the activity as 100/100

Anoon,



The issue with EV at activity level is that you cannot calculate productivity by resource UNLESS each activity has only one resource.



If an activity was estimated at 100 manhours of Mechanical work and 100 manhours of electrical work.



You are 50% complete, that is achieved 50 hours of both disciplines.



You have expended 25 hours of mechanical time

You have expended 75 hours of electrical time



P6 can only show the productivity of the activity as 1.0



NOT productivity of mechanical as 50/25

AND productivity of electrical as 50/75



JUST productivity of the activity as 100/100

Plan Plan,



re: post # 17, you said your biggest problem is "EV at resource level"



I believe that it can only be done by proper and comprehensive estimations at the basics and at the earliest stage of the project which seldom or never happens in real life, especially if the project includes engineering and procurement.



EV is easy if the weighting factors are set at the beginning, but because you (Planner) don’t always have the necessary data or complete information and collections of which sometimes goes with the life of the project, it prevents the establishment of a comprehensive Baseline Schedule, and what you got is a changeable program/schedule because you can never get approval of your Baseline.

Hi Everybody,



The biggest problem with P6 is lack of training. It is completely different to P3. Indeed Ron Winter, one of the smartest guys moderating these forums has said that knowing P3 inside out was probably a disadvantage when cominmg to P6.



I believe many of you out there were expected to teach yourself P6, because you knew P3. I consider that to be close to impossible, especially if you have a "day job" managing a project.



Almost every issue I see raised here is a lack of training, how do we ensure that planners get trained properly?

Dear All



As a good planner, the software know how is important.... but the planning know how is more critical to become a successful planner.



For planner who is so use the P3 know how and when they swap to P6 that part of the comfort zone is lost. As a result, they will go thought the change cycle from avoiding to accepting. And for some, they will never reach the end of the cycle. Remember this we spend years to develop the plannig know how, and just because we loose part of the "TOOLS" know how, we should not give up learning.



Be positive ...



Alex

please how to do that in P6

show resources cost/table filtered by cost account, it is so intuitive in p3, but i can’t figure out how to do it in P6, basically we make EARNED VALUE charts for res sources filtered by cost account (material, personnel, engines etc )



thanks:



ps: i am still young and with no strong P3 experience so i am open to change ;)

Well, go to the Assignments, bring the layout what u need, " CTRL ’A’ " then "CTRL ’C’", then paste in the spreadsheet, or press hold CTRL, click the resource one by one then "CTRL ’C’" then paste in the spreadsheet.



Hope it works for you.



cheers

Respected Planners



Apart from generalised discussion on P5/P6 Problems, please help me know how is resourse usage spread sheet & resourse usage profile printed/exported(To Excel).

Gentlemen



Forgot to mention that X-Pert is fully AS4817:2006 The Australian earned value standard - compliant, as well as Sarbanes Oxley



So if EV via resourcing is your thing, then YOU cannot go past X-Pert



Again being a bit ironic - the biggest problem in P6 is all the old P3 users -



Has anybody noticed that today’s defence forces have stopped using Bows and Arrows :-)



Raf

Gentlemen



It is amazing how many people are against Change.

As a Planning and Scheduling engineer I almost feel sorry for Primavera, for having a user base that is not willing to take the time or the effort to change.



But if you want to get around all the problems you are all complaining about and make the effort to Change.



Then I suggest (tongue firmly in cheek) that you try

X-Pert from www.microplanning.co.uk, or www.microplanning.com or even www.microplanning.com.au



Then you will how easy Critical Path is and not trying to plan with a Gantt Chart, which is an output not an input



My five cents - again



Raf

the biggest problem in P6? I think the user(s) ..how many in the world are they? how old is P6? maybe i’m one of those lucky few who had a chance to use P6 (i agree it’s different from P3) you need to re-learn, learning is a continuous process...what a boring world if it’s not!

Suresh,



From another tread, I think you % complete problem is a simple understanding and knowledge issue. Don’t blame the car when you are the driver forgot to put the key in the hole.



Pete,



I think no one in the world can come up with a software or anything that is free of bugs. (except GOD) Try to ask Microsoft to have a bug free OS.



The biggest complaint I have is always comes from planner with 20+ years experience and so use to P3 and don’t want to give up their full control of the system (Silo)



Alex

Omar,



You are a genius.



Primavera only want to squeezed lots and lots of money from us without any value added.



I agree with this:For planners like myself who, in my industry, use planning software to analyse & manage project time, and have other software to manage detail level data for engineering, procurement and construction progress, the requirement is a relatively simple one - a package that performs trustworthy forward/backward pass calculations, with competent time and resource analysis.



What we need is the simplicity of P3.

I believe that Primavera is no longer all that interested in what was once its traditional customer base;a look at software surveys shows that about 75% of planners still use (and like) P3.



For planners like myself who, in my industry, use planning software to analyse & manage project time, and have other software to manage detail level data for engineering, procurement and construction progress, the requirement is a relatively simple one - a package that performs trustworthy forward/backward pass calculations, with competent time and resource analysis. The added complexity of products like P5/P6 have done nothing to improve planner productivity and obscures rather than aids the practice of sound network analysis techniques. The ’enterprise’ feature is valueless to us because the management of EPC/EPCM projects are ’stand-alone’ in their nature. The big resource companies, banks etc are in fact Primavera’s new customer base - certainly not the construction industry.



It is tempting to compare Primavera with Microsoft - we have just moved to Office 2007 and the annoying need to re-learn the endless menu/icon changes that have added nothing but appearance changes to what were basically sound products in the 2003 version.



I think one of the most contemptible acts of Primavera (P5/6)is to release an expensive product without any quality, in-built graphic reporting capability. Even my $100 chess database programs have top quality reporting/printing utilities.

Suresh,



I am the world’s leading (although self appointed) expert in percent complete in P6.



There is no exact equivalent between p3 and p6. If your issue is trying to replicate P3’s percent complete calculations in p6 you will not be able to.



I would be happy to read through what you want to do and offer my opinion.



Mike, who just posted below, is one of many who think that P6’s artihmetic and features have some sort of relationship with P3. The IPR of both products are owned by the same company. That’s it.



One of the big mistakes organisations make "migrating" to P6 is they just want to do it the same way as P3. It is essential to go back to the fundamentals and restate the project management process you require, and THEN map that to P6, not modify the P3 expectations.

I face a lot of problems related to the duration and % complete when i migrate from p3 to p6. I done all in correct way as per knowledgebase and primavera tech instruction. Every day i have the webex meeting with primavera guys and still they hvnt got any rectification.

Andrew,



Its not really a planning tool - its a project management environment. As such its not just for planners. Of course there are lots of compromises when you want to make a system that is for cost engineers, managers, all sorts. We recently configured P6 to print sales invoices for hours burned and earned and then it sends a spreadsheet to the sales ledger. That astonishing level of integration and configurability was worth far more to that customer than the techie stuff we regularly tell Primavera is missing.



I’ve got over my frustration that many really great features for expert users that I have enjoyed in various packages in the last, let me see, the best part of 40 years have not made it into P6.



I still send Tony Banks of Primavera a regular "top ten frustrations" list. It is SO clear that P6 is a product at the beginning of its development cycle and it would be nice if they were incorporated.



But I guess I am lucky in not having to replicate a 20th century silo-planning environment with a 21st century tool.

Hi All



The biggest problem with P6 is that it is a direct decendant of some 1960’s 8 bit software designed for DOS operation.



My first computer had 64k ram and no hard drive - P3 was designed for that platform and it has not advanced much.



Being the first does not make it the best



All the evolutions and developments have not changed the fact that it was crap to start with.



PowerProject re wrote the book - look listen learn and change.



Best regards



Mike Testro

David,

I am complaining about Primavera, V5 & V6.

The fact that nobody cares is a direct result of the fact that a lot of planners out there are either simple keyboard jockeys living in a Bill Gates powered world or they are very smart and have shut the hell up just so they can make a boat load of cash.



Pete

Pete Planner,



is this Primavera you are complaining about, or Microsoft?

Plan Plan,



When I first realised this some years ago, I thought my clients would complain. Yours is the first time I have seen or heard of anyone complaining about this. Amazing, perhaps nobody cares?

Pete Planner,



its not a problem, its an opportunity. I’ve done the "few years", I understand the product, my day rate has doubled.



Result.

For me,



The boggest problem in P6



is that



I cannot afford to buy P6.



So i’ll stay with P5 and P3.



I wish like manna from heaven for someone to give it to me for free. Amen.



In the event this will happened, then and only then, will i dig deeper "WHAT IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IN P6.

Without a doubt the biggest problem with P6 is P6......



Why would a software development company rush a brand new version of a product to market knowing full well, that it did not work as advertised.



Why would a software development company rush a brand new version of a product to market knowing full well, that there are BUGs in the system that were around in P5 when it was released.



How can a company that claims it can rid the world of project failure when its tool CAN’T EVEN PERFORM THE BASIC FUNCTIONS OF RESOURCE LEVELLING



How can a company justify ethical behavior by buying all of the platinum sponsorships of all of the conferences it can find - A Million to the PMI-COS conference in Chicargo last month wasn’t it?????????



Here’s a tool that is so damned complicated to use it takes most people a few years to understand what the hell is going on inside it.



Here is a tool that can have over 50,000 different combinations of calculating the same data and get a different answer each time.



PRIMAVERA HAS TRIED TO PLEASE EVERY USER AND IN DOING SO HAS FORGOTTON THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SCHEDULING.

The biggest problem i face is the P6 wont give you the project % complete information when you are NOT using the costloading and when u use physical % complete type as % complete.