Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Camel

Concept And Unity

13 posts in this topic

I notice that there are almost zero posts about Concept or Unity. Why is this. Are they not used that much? Does anyone else use them? This is all we use. Soon we will not even use concept. We actually assisted schnieder electric with the live field test of unity not too long ago and i thought it was a great program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our firm use Concept. Me have many project on Concept 2.2 and 2.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm using Concept. Not seeing any problems that we unable to solve yet. Lots of upgrade job currently using 2.6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have used PL7 Pro and UnityPro. The unitypro is applied for large project, manage database good. you can import and export from PL7, Concept, especially simulator. we can test program that not plc. My company bought PLC premium TSX57-2623 use PL7, but I updated fireware to use UnityPro. My idea use UnityPro is very good to automation programmer. However, the price of this software is very expensive. For this reason, to get in touch with somebody. I think to popular about this software, Schneider Electric Corporation should to have plan about price to somebody to know to it, especially is student. They know UnityPro is what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've used Concept and PL7 Pro, but the company I worked for got rid of Modicon before Unity was released. Concept and PL7 Pro were good packages. But one obvious flaw in Modicon is the pricing. Even Concept and ProWORX32 were almost $5000 US. Even Allen Bradley, who is notorious for high prices, sells their software for $2500. Modicon has to really rethink the way they do that if they want to remain a player in the PLC market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From my experience with earlier versions of Concept, I've stayed away from it as much as possible. Maybe the frenchies have improved it since then, but now wehre I work all I use is AB...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really enjoyed Concept 2.2, 2.5 and 2.6. The new version always had improved stability. Did not have the chance yet to use Unity. I think the old question remains whether or not the vendor wants to sell hardware (plc's) or software. Either way, you still nedd the software to use a vendors' plc, drive, etc. We insist that the vendors supply us with a copy of the software if they want us to use their hardware. Has any of the vendors come up with a decent reason why we, the SI widening the use of their hardware, have to pay for software needed to program the PLC's????? Just pondering.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. Return on investment. They invest millions in making the software, and make pennies on the hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crossbow, If I think about it, that does not make sense. Return on investment???? How? Take a typical example. I, the SI, pay for the software once, annualy, to get the latest/ greatest version. How many copies of software do you need to sell to compensate for the cost of development? It would make more sense to spend some of the money made by selling hardware and re-invest this money into research/ development. I say that the software's development price should be covered by the manufacturers, ie. I receive the software free of charge. The other alternative would be that all harware manufacturers use the same or even similar "core/ kernel" and you, as the SI, using whatever editor you want (OS independant of course), will simply code your piece of software and download the program to the PLC. Your end result would be you having ONE program and ONE cable to program ALL plc's!!! Wishfull thinking.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry I left my guide to the perfect world in the car... When you think about it in perspective, companies like Microsoft can sell software for cheap because they sell MILLIONS of copies. Think about the money they make on a $500 office package. Now look at a complete operating system like PLC software, and think of the hundreds of copies, not millions. And with people buying 200 dollar brick PLCs, how much money do you think the hardware companies make on that? Minimal... There's not much that money to be made on the hardware. Still takes nearly as many hundreds of hours of programming to write the code though. I agree that it would be nice if it was covered, but think how many people use it. Economies of scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have given this subject some thought. It might not be a bad idea to introduce some sort of basic package. Then only sell the bits you need. I think that Siemens are doing this (PID, COMMS, OP, etc.). This means that if you are only programming x range of PLC's, you do not need to buy for range Y of PLC's. For the SI entering the market, this would be more practical. Anyway, my ranting and raving will not change the world. It is only in the bible that David beat Golliath.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most vendors, Mitsubishi included, offer a 'lite' version of their programming software for OEMs and SIs that will not need the entire toolset. The Mitsubishi GX-Developer-FX is designed for people who will only use the brick style PLCs. And the GX-Configurator packages for special function modules and GX-Simulator are sold seperately so the people who are not going to need that functionality do not have to pay for it. As a systems integrator, I think you would agree (I don't know conditions in your country, but at least in ours) that the original titles and software maintenance plans from Mitsubishi are cost effective compared to some others. I've seen PLC software sold for over TRIPLE what GX-Developer costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can agree with you. The cost of GX Developer is ok and much better than that of the others. GX IEC is a different beast though.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0