Couple random questions off the top of my head ...
1. What does your company use?
I run my own Co. and have tried a couple, the ones I stuck with the most were TSD200 and Prosteel and I'm still currently using Prosteel (which is also Rebis AutoPlant) although I'm working on some tools to go back to vanilla acad 3d solids and editing.
Prosteel is what I will discuss here.
2. Does it scale well (works equally well on small plants as well as mega projects)? e.g. COADE (CADWorx) does not scale well to large projects because it is model based rather than database based.
Yes, it's not too bad if you have a reasonable pc setup for CADD work. If the models get too large you can also use xreffing or break the job up into workable sizes. If I do this, I will bring in any interfacing objects from the first model into the new model for reference. At the time of checking I'll bring all models into one and 'bolt' them together just to make sure it all works but I will not do any db work with it as it can get slow with some operations.
3. Does it adapt to your work flows or does it force a work flow scheme on you that is unwieldy?
It does force a certain workflow on you that's not entirely different to how you would work anyway. I've personally found this to be ok when working on an entire project myself but when working with more than 1 person on a project it can make it more difficult to check the output without a really strict work practices that more often than not can't be adhered to due to time constraints on a project.
This is the main reason I'll be switching back to vanilla - and also the cost for more seats - current cost in Australia is ~10kAU with 1 years support (~1500/year).
4. Can notifications be suspended? i.e. early developmental ("what if we try this, that ...") work work well with P&ID software that sends out a notification every time you change something because said work is so dynamic. If notifications can't be suspended it can be maddening.
It doesn't send out notifications as such but does notify you of changes that have happened to detailed documents that require updating. This idea is good but not always as reliable as you would like.
5. Are the modules well integrated and "cross module aware" or does it strike you as a bunch of work by different software vendors duct taped together and sold under the umbrella of the Plant softwar vendor?
Pretty well integrated. It does have a lot of features that I don't and wouldn't use making it a bit bulky. I guess this is a result of trying to target many disciplines and work methods of different countries etc.
6. Is model versioning supported, i.e. Staging: Issued for Design, Issued for Construction ... as well as State: "As-Designed" versus "As-Built" etc.
You could accomplish this by 'saving as' but no, not that I know of.
7. Robust and mature translation / Migration tools? i.e. Can fully import / export plant models (and associated databases) from other vendors or previous versions of ther own software?
It does have some import/export capabilities but I haven't used them. The models we would receive from an engineer would need very thorough checking and would more than likely need many changes as they're 'knocked up' for design mainly. We would call these details 'Noddy' drawings/models as they are not very accurate.
8. Does it support SAP integration?
Not sure.
9. Experienced user pools one can draw work force and experience from?
Yes, there are at least 2 discussion boards that I know of with many experienced users. And there's also support.
10. How much administrative support is required? Just a few or is it prohibitive unless you have a minimum of x number of CAD operators / designers?
Once you had a good system in place and your users were properly trained it would be pretty low maintenance regardless of cad user numbers.
11. Is there a documented programmer's API c/w programmer's reference and tutorial?
Yes, there is a vba reference that's pretty comprehensive and has many examples. The main use would be to design custom connections, to get the most out of this feature you really need a good knowledge of 3d geometry concepts and calculations. A good knowledge of OOP and how Prosteel works is also necessary.
12. Has vendor's tech support been responsive in a timely and helpful manner?
Yes.
13. After having used the software and had time to reflect it's effectiveness for your company and projects are you content with the decision to use said software?
This is purely personal and I don't mean to pick out Prosteel in particular, I've found after using and testing quite a few different app's over the years that they all steer you to their way of doing things because that's the way their software works. This makes sense and has many benefits if your users are properly trained and experienced. They also have many downfalls, to achieve these capabilities some use custom objects and then you have to deal with proxy objects or conversions, enablers etc - a right pain when distributing files to other people.
The output is not as flexible as most would like either in anything but the most simple details. I've actually gone back to manually adding dimensions to the output rather than cleaning up what's dished out to a presentable detail. Again this is purely personal and some people find the output quite acceptable.
14. Do you feel it is good value for the money?
Again, only my opinion as I have a small office - not really. If I was working by myself again I'd probably still use it though but it's just too hard in a small office to train, oversee and check all that's being produced without a good drafting and checking system. PS doesn't provide this (easily) and can make my job harder than needed.
While it has many good features, if you don't do things 'just' the right way you can spend a lot of time just getting things to work that should be a simple task. A lot of this has to do with training and experience and once you 'master' it you will have little problems and be very productive.
The only problem with this scenario is staffing - you either hire a Prosteel 'operator' or you hire perfectly good drafters that could take many months to train to master the product and may eventually leave anyway. This is also what I'm trying to avoid in my office by using as many standard acad commands and features as possible and a workable system that can change and grow as my company does.