Share your experience using Eagle Technology Proteus

We are reselling IBM Maximo as well. I find the automation products to be the most valuable features.

I find the automation products to be the most valuable features. When it comes to their reporting and analytics capabilities, I find them to be superb.

IBM Maximo could learn from its competitors by going aggressive to market, probably looking at price discounting, and emphasizing orientation and training and services to the end customer directly from IBM. Those three things can help. They should promote it more in my opinion.

I have been dealing with IBM Maximo for eight years.

I usually do not recommend SAP products instead of IBM Maximo; the customer bought from SAP directly instead of buying IBM Maximo from us. They went ahead with SAP modules and modernization and improvisation there.

SAP has advantages over IBM Maximo in that it was for one customer who was using HANA. IBM Maximo is expensive, and it is not a very well-known product in India. People have not heard of it. We tried selling it to Pune Metro, and they wanted to integrate with SAP, but the price that was quoted was very high.

I assess IBM Maximo's integration with IoT and AI as an excellent product to work with from a future-wise and technology-wise perspective. However, it is very difficult to sell in India because of the price point and no known expertise on the feature level at IBM, along with SAP in competition, which has its own tool to provide this kind of solution for asset management.

IBM Maximo's asset tracking feature is difficult to sell in India because of price. It is not popular in India because of price and IBM not pushing, so it is not very easy to sell. We tried pushing it to some of the people who are running metro, but we did not get any big success. My overall rating for this review is 6.

My main use case for Hexagon EAM is that I was a developer at Hexagon, and I perform customizations as part of client requirements.

A specific example of a customization I have worked on using Hexagon EAM involved creating Flexes to bypass the standard workflow. Instead of changing a work order directly from open to in-progress status, I added customizations such as waiting for materials and waiting for budget statuses. When an original technician gets assigned to it, the status changes to in-progress. If a technician is removed from the activity, it changes to a waiting for assign status. When a technician gets attached again, it changes to assign status, and then once the technician approves it, it changes to in-progress.

I have created several reports and worked on EAFs regarding my main use case and other customizations I have performed.

The best features Hexagon EAM offers, in my experience, are the status customizations, which are easier from an end-user perspective. Users can simply go to status authorization to make changes.

The status custom license feature makes things easier for end users in that if a supervisor needs access to change a work order into cancel status, they can simply go to status auth, give the status auth user role, and then select the entity they want to do it for, such as purchase order. They select purchase order and fill in the from status to status and then save it. Once they log in to Hexagon EAM, these new statuses are reflected.

Hexagon EAM has positively impacted our organization. It was our first project, and after go-live, it resulted in huge success. The client was satisfied and thrilled, and we received positive feedback.

Specific outcomes from that success include cost reductions around 30%, labor utilization increased by 20%, and new users are adopting the systems and appreciate the product and are eager to work in those systems.

Hexagon EAM can be improved, especially in workflows. If I observe other applications, I can customize the workflow as part of not only the out-of-box features, allowing for proper customization of the flow. However, in Hexagon EAM, I noticed I cannot customize the flow and can only use status auth, which I think is a limitation.

That is the main thing I thought of regarding needed improvements at the moment, and I can send an email if I find or recollect something else.

I have been using Hexagon EAM for two years.

In my experience, Hexagon EAM is quite stable.

Regarding scalability, I feel that we need an extra column, but we need to raise a ticket to Hexagon every time. Since it is very difficult for us, I think we need to find a way to manipulate these things. Adding more columns to existing objects is very hard, and I need to create custom tables and link them to the existing tables, which makes coding very challenging.

The customer support is quite acceptable. I cannot say it is excellent; it is more of an average rating. I would rate the customer support of Hexagon EAM a seven out of ten.

Positive

I had been working on Maximo solutions as well, and then the client specifically asked for Hexagon EAM, so we switched from Maximo to Hexagon EAM. Since both are in the same background, it was quite easier for us to pick up.

We have seen a return on investment as we learned several things while using Hexagon EAM, and then we implemented those to the client, resulting in their satisfaction.

We have not evaluated other options since the client specifically asked for Hexagon EAM, so we chose Hexagon EAM.

The advice I would give to others looking into using Hexagon EAM is to be careful while writing Flexes. Since Flexes are based on PL/SQL, if I mess up with any PL/SQL, I cannot save any records, so I need to write proper, optimized, and user-friendly code and add comments so if someone else works on it, they can easily understand and make changes. The same applies to EAFs. As EAF works dynamically, I need to cover all aspects such as before saving, after save, before render, and after render, writing each function carefully to avoid breaking the system. I would rate this product a six out of ten overall.