While I’d love to have a really economical version available for home automation, for industrial use I can’t say the single client limited licenses are too costly; they offer so much more than other options and the price is very reasonable (less than far inferior SCADA products we previously used which you also had to license per client–and tags too).
These limited client licenses are not listed on the website last I checked, but your sales rep at IA can give you a quote. We use them for single machine HMIs with the bonus that we can add clients to them over time until they become unlimited licenses. In one case, we’ve fully made that transition while gradually taking over all the various other HMIs in the plant. Initial cost for one client is very affordable, and so is adding each client. It was actually cheaper to replace an obsolete HMI with a new industrial fanless PC, large IP65 touch screen, and Ignition single client than to upgrade to a newer version of the obsolete proprietary hardware. Of course this switch gave us a lot of other benefits too.
If the $10k+ package.is way too much, consider the possibility you’re trying to sell an excavator where a garden trowel would do and ask your sales rep about the entry level options IA has available.
When I look at projects using WW, the price for these projects is still cheaper with unlimited tags in Ignition in most cases. If you are looking at 500 tags or less, we start considering Edge Panel. We also consider future expansion. I guess it really depends on what exactly you need.
You should also consider that with full blown Ignition, this comes with unlimited clients. For other systems, now I'm buying another license for the same tag count. If I were to do a project with 300 tags, using the Edge Panel would make sense, but if I needed 10 clients running with 300 tags, using Ignition unlimited gives you the tags AND the clients.
A business acquaintance of mine is a Siemens/WW SI. He did a job in China. Normally, he uses MsSQL. On this job his employee thought MySql would be better. He landed on site, and could not get WW talking to MySQL. He logged a ticket but had no response. After a couple of days he figured it out. Sitting in the departure lounge, he got an email from WW support saying "Someone in your area needs help! - Topic “MySQL with WW?”
One think I like in winCC OA scripting is that programmer can write a script on initialisation of page/ screen so that when page is active The script runs continuously in background until page is active or closed… this feature helps in creating dynamic animation/visualization with out any extra efforts
WinCC OA licensing is based on primarily on the number of tags and the device drivers selected, you have to purchase server license, client license (Run time license), also license comes in a dongle (Hardware license with shield file) which has to be connected to server permanently.
As compared to Ignition it is costlier but you can design any big projects (Like power plants, Oil refinaries) with little understanding of C programming.
Ignition is having a vision towards future technologies but WinCC OA still works like traditional old school SCADA.
The existing massive SIEMENS base is a very big advantage for WinCC OA to penetrate the market easily. Otherwise, i think whatever WinCC OA can do, Igntion can do but NOT vice-versa. WinCC OA is NOT as open as Ignition. Anybody can download Ignition and evaluate but WinCC OA is a top secret available only for a privileged club. Nevertheless, i can say that WinCC OA can become a serious threat for Ignition if they ignore.
A very honest analysis. I too felt WW very boring and even annoyed a client and lost a big job for saying openly that WW will not work (for a cloud deployed smart city pilot project). I could have easily played along and made some dirty money. Till date i wonder, despite demonstrating and far exceeding the project specs with Ignition, why the client was adamant on WW and backed off?.
Interesting WW/Ignition comparison, and–having worked with both–I concur with the general consensus there.
Regarding the lost job, in general “X will not work” is probably not the best approach. Chances are WW would work. Whether it is the best choice is another question. As long as you know you can do the job, you can always give one price for doing the job with WW and another for doing it with Ignition. Just be prepared for some clients choosing familiar over unfamiliar regardless of other considerations. There are many possible reasons for this, from corporate standard to what staff are familiar with, to fears–perhaps unjustified–that the new product may be harder to support, or being good friends with another salesman.
We’ve quoted jobs to clients using their requested platform versus our preferred platform, and they sometimes choose the more costly option (more costly product/licencing, and more of our time). We’ve also told a client they would have to find someone else to do the job on the platform they wanted as we simply didn’t have time to do it right on that platform, though we’d be happy to do it on many other platforms.
Ignition is BIG YES for large scale complex, a big yes for projects where a lot of scripting is required
it saves lot of time, no installation is required / zero foot print is required for Both Runtimes and Development
Ignition / setup is expensive at the begninng, but those who work on Scada Systems / Large and Complex for plants they understand that Ignition is a very opne and fliexible tool
Where are Ignition also lacks process knowledge and lacks domain expertise and lacks technical backup for process issues, and also igniton lacks many approvals and features necessary for being a truly Totallly Integrated Process Control Software with Process Models, which we can find in Siemens / ABB, Process Diagnisis Tools, Optimizers…
So Ignition is the best tool a programmer can have - process knowlege / domain expertise (for process control)
But for smaller applications, and requirements, HMI systems, Still Simens is the Best
FYI, Ignition is designed as a direct replacement and better alternative for WW Archestra. I think, WinCC, FTView and WW Archestra are windows based and almost identical in functionalities.
To gain expertise on a product, training is a must. It's better for new SI's to attend Ignition training to master the tips, tricks and dig out the deep secrets buried inside Ignition. Compared to other SCADA's, Ignition has a bit steep learning curve. But the rewards are very high.
My best proposition for WinCC, FTView and WW Archestra clients:
Think Ignition as a partner. Deploy it as a "parallel SCADA" on Linux, start serving remote control room, ML and analytical service for 100's of web clients and make money
Have a look at IntegraXor. It’s not perfect but it’s cost effective, very user friendly, and has all the functions you need. Has tonnes of driver support and fairly good cutomer sevice.
