33 Replies Latest reply on May 4, 2010 6:09 PM by MichaelvdV@Atos

    New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft


      This thread originated from another discussion thread, where members asked about future directions from OSIsoft.


      The truth is, there isn't much concrete to share at this point.

      • There are developers working on projects
      • One project involves a new client product focused on ad hoc analysis
      • One project involves advanced analytics, probably some edge processing (but I know less about that, since it isn't a client product per se)
      • One project involves standardizing the visualization widgets we use (e.g., trends, gauges, etc.) in a variety of client products
      As these are all new efforts, I expect the results will have lots of familiar aspects but some new never-before-seen-from-OSIsoft aspects. I'm just not sure which aspects will be there just yet.
        • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

          OK, this is John Baier, Director of Product Management.   I have to commend Laurie on being sufficiently vague about any new development, as these are her instructions.   That said, instead of us saying more about what we have planned, maybe we can get a little discussion going about what all of you would like to see.   This forum, and vCampus in general, is a great place to voice your opinions and help us prioritize our development efforts.   We are looking to deliver our new visualization products to achieve the most value for all customers in all industries.   Given that, what would all of you like OSIsoft to concentrate on in the visualization space?   What would you like us to provide to help you partner with us in visualization?


          thanks for the discussion, I think it's really healthy and helpful,



            • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

              Allright, the topic I was waiting for!


              Here is a quick outline of my idea's for this application.


              For the sake of readability, I will call this project X.






              First of all, X should not be dependant on Sharepoint. While Sharepoint is a great collaborative tool, I have come across several situations where a
              company does not want a Sharepoint based environment. Sharepoint is a very large application, which causes significant performance loss. Sharepoint is
              simply too 'big' to be required for X.


              This does not mean that X should not be able to run in Sharepoint. If a company already has Sharepoint in place, they could either choose to use X in
              that environment, or serve it seperatly in a different environment.




              In my opinion, the best way to make X a succesful product, is to create it as a Rich Internet Application (RIA). In this way, users will have the
              experience of a desktop client application, and still have the benefits of a webbased application.


              As an client environment, Silverlight would be the best choice. Silverlight focusses a lot on creating Bussiness applications (as supposed to Flash).
              Silverlight has great access to Webservices and has the .NET RIA Framework.


              Choosing WPF as a framework for the client is not a wise decision in my opinion, since it needs the entire .NET framework (+150mb), while Silverlight
              only needs about 5mb.


              The development of HTML5 has to be taken in consideration, as HTML5 will provide a lot of the features Silverlight has today. As HTML5 will be a widely
              accepted standard (as supposed to a product from a single company, in this case Silverlight from Microsoft).




              X should be plugin based (for instance using the Managed Extension Framework (MEF)). In this way, client load time and network traffic will be kept to a
              minimum. The bare framework should be loaded at runtime, and as more functionality is needed, the additional functionality (in the form of plugins)
              will be loaded (in the background).


              X should both have a designer and a viewer (much like Processbook). It should not be needed to use an external tool (like ProcessBook) to create the
              visuals, and then a webbased viewer to view them. This should be in the same application X.


              X should have (hierarchical organized) workbooks with displays. This way, a master - detail view can be created.




              The visual components should be designed much like webparts in sharepoint. Components would have a 'container' which contains basic settings (position, width, height, name). The actual component itself should be inside this container.


              Developers should have access to an SDK for X (Silverlight based) to create their own components. This SDK should provide access to the design surface, other components on the surface, and the datasources (PI, AF, OLEDB). These visuals should then have to be registered in X, to make it possible for them to be used in the workbook.


              This also causes a design concern, as not all displays will be exchangable between installations of X (where different components are registered).


              Besides creating your own visual components, there should be the possibility to extend the X Workbook. This should be done in a .NET language. X should support both VB.NET and C# (and should have the possibilty to extend the languages to other Silverlight supported .NET language, like IronPython or F#). Let's call this scripting.


              Users should be able to use interactive components like button, listbox, combobox, etc. The events which come with these components should be acessable in the scripting environment. In this way, interactive applications can be created in X in a simple way. (e.g. have a number of tags in a listbox, and when the selection changes, a trend gets updated).


              While Silverlight currently does not support runtime compiling, .NET does. The server (Webservice) could compile the 'scripts' on the fly, and send the
              compiled result back to the client, where it will be integrated into the current workbook/display.


              Lool and feel


              While X is an webbased application, it should have the look and feel of a webapplication. Users expect different look & feel from webbased applications.

                • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                  Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Michael. Your suggestions are mostly about the technology that should be used.


                  Any thoughts on what the application should do for users? Choosing those priorities is a bigger challenge than choosing the right technology to provide said functionality. 





                    • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                      Server Side:


                          * Easier maintaince of the system
                          *  Less need for spezial constructions like (future data in an external table....
                          *  Easiere maintaince for big installations (delete data from some datasources after a year with  a simply drop partition)

                      • Future Data
                        (like Aspentech IP 21, Honeywell PHD,...
                      • Partition for different datasources
                        (like Aspentech IP 21)
                      • Partitions for different resultions
                        (like Honywell PHD, they automatic generate different resolutions in different partitions) => increase of the performace,
                      • Centralized Logging (all the loggings from the interface should be forwarded to the Server)  or at least, it should be able to see everything from the SMT (like Wonderware  System management Console => in general a positive example for systemmanagemt..)
                      • There should by a Diagnostic more KPI / traffic light based (wonderware historian, aspentech system diagnostic)....

                        o   That's funny that a product which advertise with processpictures full of traffic lights and kpi for diagnose the process. But to diagnose the system there are a lot of trends, numbers in fancy command line tools and so one.
                        o   This should be created automatic.
                        o   This should generate suggestions how to improve the system configuration (parameters, hardware...)

                      • Fully support of Windows Backup, no need for an PI - Backup, or other products.



                      • Less programming, more standard solutions.


                      o   TCP integration

                      o   Possiblity for 2 Way communication

                      o   Event based trigger.

                      Client Side:

                      Goal:     Usability, Usability, Usability (compare http://www.poetpainter.com/thoughts/article/a-user-experience-hierarchy-of-needs)



                      • Perfect Support of the work flow.

                      o   User has an Tree which can be searched , sorted in different ways, there he selects a value of interest

                      o   Drag and Drop onto  the screen as an object (engine,valve, tank) or in the trend

                      o   Analyzing the Data in the trend tool (cursor,..)

                      o   Further analyzing in excel, data mining tools or just sending per Email see Xxxx

                      o   And this without a break in the userflow (like trend => excel)  see Xxxx

                      • The „Configuration" for tags in trends should be below (like Aspentech, Honeywell, Wonderware, Siemens, AX,...)

                      • Directly Editing Equations, without the need for datasets  (like Aspentech)
                      • More Userbility when you work with a lot of trend lines. ( #                                                                   291001)

                      • Controls (Trend, XY, SQC, Batch, Radar Chart,...)
                      • Object orientation (.net controls)

                      • Templates for the processbook ("like an inherited form in .net")

                      • Customizing ( => we want to hide the workbook, or the some entries in the tag selection (like database, af,..)

                      • An Great Search Tool (with Trees, Path, Fulltextsearch,...) a hint is http://www.infragistics.com/dotnet/netadvantage/winforms

                      • Big Buttons with text and symbol (Ribbons)

                      • One Tool - not at least 3 tools (SMT, Processbook, System Explorer or more .. Manual Logger,...)
                      • Datagrid in the matrix form (as mentioned in the former post)
                      • Xxxx

                      o   if i have selected the trend and i have pressed a special button (we called it clipboard) then I got a screenshot of the trend for pasting it in a word or an email)

                      o   If I have selected a datagrid (in a matrix - form ) an pressed the special button the I get the data and can paste it into excel or somewhere

                      o   No workarounds with screenshot, export to csv,... the only breaks the flow of the user.






                      Goal: Make it work for us

                      • For priorities please solve ( #: 289733 / WI 11654) or  (#: 289578  / WI 11648) before the release of the new AF, otherwise the AF - Excelplugin is useless in the german speaking world or in countries which are not utc0
                      • we use af for a lot of different structures, configurations,... please keep in mind it is not everything for assets



                      Release Process:

                      • for example for   #: 289749/ 20284OSI8 there is target Version, but i find no release date for this version => what does it mean for me:
                        i have to restart (no often, but sometimes) after  configuration changes of the interface...





                      If were in the development role I would choose wpf with microsoft blend as the Userinterface and an indeep integration of the osisoft controls and data), just a the final message ;-), that my developer heart has also spoken...

                      • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                        From my perspective any next generation (NG) application should accomodate:


                        Real-time data (goes without saying really)

                        Without a doubt the heaviest use of ProcessBook.  Can go in to improvement details within here too but I am sure you have a team of developers on this...

                        Reactive components aka MultiStating.
                        Only with much better MultiStating ability - including MultiStated trends/traces.

                        ...almost as if the NG tool and AF are the same product.  All configuration and libraries of displays/workbooks are stored (or just configured) within AF.  When you create a display, the data/calculations/components used within it are all present within the housing AF server (just re-use the existing AF plug-in functionality for new components), so anybody with access to the AF server can use your display.  Data can come from any Data Reference within AF - no more ODBC Data Sources etc.

                        Manual Inputs. 
                        Always requested where ever I go, that via ProcessBook they want to enter values.  Pinch PI-ManualLogger concepts, wrap them up in AF (i.e. PI Point DR, re-use AF SQL DB).  As AF would be a core part of the NG application, manual inputs become standard functionality.  Based on WIS there are no security configuration headaches.

                        Datasets "view". 
                        For each display, you can switch to a Dataset view tab (bit like the DataTable / SQL code views in SQL Server) and know what tags are referenced, what time periods etc.  Each of these Datasets can be exported (to Datalink, xml etc).  You would then be able to change the data displayed, how it is configured etc without ever opening the display.  Eliminate all those old problems of ServerID's embedded in the display...


                        A lot of the concepts in ProcessBook are great but need 'modernising' - these concepts should be the core of the product rather than add-ons.  I still like the idea of opening PISystemExplorer (or equivalent) and having all the items above (and more) available to me based on my user account authenticated against a PI/AF collective.

                          • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                            I also like the Idea of System - Explorer like  "outlook"


                            SMT, Processbook, System - Exporer can be one tool ?


                            => Take a look at Honeywell PHD Uniformance  (http://hpsweb.honeywell.com/NR/rdonlyres/AD77627B-3D19-4B97-84DF-92FDC74F02B1/62139/Uniformance_Process_Studio_PIN.pdf) => not that i can recommend this software...


                            I agree with the "Manual Input" => but the possiblity the features of the manual logger are usefull too.



                              • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                I do like Manual Logger (although we can't really talk about it on here...) but it needs to be integrated in to another tool rather than being standalone - with some improvements here and there.


                                With PI connections storage planning to move to AF, Event Frames moving to AF it just seems display management should also move to AF.  I did work on some ProcessBook to AF configuration (and posted some code snippets on here) so when a display is opened, it goes to AF to describe the symbols & configuration but it was such a mountain of work compared to having it built in to the tool as standard.
                                You could build "ProcessBook Templates" in the AF Library so when you create a new display, you can base it on one of the templates.

                              • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                Rhys, great writeup, this is very much inline with what we are thinking about going forward.   I totally agree with getting manual input into the core product, there are many scenarios for this.   I also like your concept about the deep integration with AF, this is also very much inline with the way we're thinking about how to best make AF pop.   Same with Mutl-state capability.


                                So, what kind graphical objects do you think we need to concentrate on (beyond Trending and mult-state variables)?   What kind of screen layouts should we support out of the box?   And what about shared versus private displays, how would you support sharing of displays in an organized and simple way?


                                thanks, this is a great conversation,



                                  • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                    *) Sharing Displays


                                    => i created a plugin which displays all processbook displays from a directory in a treeview.
                                    => On the directory i manage the rights just with "Default - Windows / AD File right management
                                    => there are for each department three directories (public, private, control room)
                                         => public is which processbook displays and reports, does the department create for the whole site
                                         => private is for the department only itself
                                         => control room is where the department has w rights, but the control room has only r rights.




                                    *) Trending


                                    I just want to repeat how important it is to increase the userbility

                                    • Managing trends with you a lot of lines
                                    • create a better more intuitive user flow.




                                    • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                      John, the tight integration with AF would be key for the public vs private exposure of the displays.  In fact, the idea would be to have "configure" vs "view" windows security groups (ideally AD groups), the author of the display (well the AF Elements/Attributes) would get default Full Access and everyone else read-only.  The author can toggle this on/off or have security groups configured for "configuration" or "view" rights.  Obviously, there would be some kind of AF display administrator to change the permissions.


                                      I have seen a lot of what Wolfgang mentions, storing the displays in windows folders that have AD security groups applied to handle who can see what and build what.  It actually works very well and if you lift that concept in to AF it would be a great start for handling the security of the displays. 


                                      With the plugins part of the NG tool, you would extend AF to have "Display Components" alongside Analysis Rules, Data References (although I guesstimate these two may merge in the future??? in to "Data Rules"???) and Time Rules.  An element would represent a symbol on a display so you set the "Display Component" for the Element and the Attributes become available (think of the symbols Properties in ProcessBook), with each Attribute with fixed inputs set as an EnumerationSet.  Programatically you could toggle the properties of the symbol by toggling the attributes....anyway, enough of that brain dump...that is for you guys to figure out the technicalities.


                                      Again, if AF is heavily used the current ProcessBook symbol library should become part of the PI System Explorer Library where symbols can be reviewed or even added by users - they would have to conform to some kind of standard/template e.g. SVG.  Then the symbols from the library can be used in displays and manipulated as per above (each symbol added to the library would have to describe it's properties aka Attributes of the symbols Element).  As with AF itself, OSI would supply a series of standard symbols, then the rest come from the users imagination.

                                        • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                          I really like the concept you are proposing Rhys!


                                          The concept you are proposing relies heavily on AF (more than that: It should be a integrated part of AF). I really like the idea of the concept, and certainly see it as a very viable 'way to go'. However, AF is not an integrated part of the PI system (it is a seperate product). We have a lot of customers who use the PI system, but have not (yet) taken the step to use/purchase AF. These customers will be excluded from using the new (SL) nextgen visualisation options. This could be an extra reason (for them) to purachase/use AF, but I don't know how this will come across from a commercial point of view.


                                          tl;dr; The nextgen visualisation system should also be available for non-AF customers.

                                            • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                              Hey Michael,


                                              I would still like to believe that one day we will see the PI data server and PI AF as a single product - in the way PI & MDB were/are one.


                                              That said, customers not using AF...well we know they are missing out


                                              There has to be a great big long road to even consider retirement of ProcessBook, it is too embedded in companies to retire over a short time period.  The NG tool would be seen as "the next step" to take to get true value from "organised" PI aka AF (I am sure OSI's marketing department can do better - well so long as they don't bring back the "Rt" branding ).  The trade off with having the tool as part of AF is you can create rich real time displays that are not limited to only PI data but only limited to the creation of an AF Data Reference (or equivalent).
                                              Let's say a company has PI and PHD, both heavily used.  ProcessBook will work with PI data and then you need an interface to get PHD data in to PI then that PHD data can be used (essentially you are duplicating data unless you use a COM connector).  If NG tool just uses the AF DR's you supply a product that works the same (Real time, multistating, trending etc) against both data sources nicely mixed together in 1 display...I have a vision in my head of the application, which is hard to explain at times because my head is so busy!


                                              Non-AF customers would still be able to use ProcessBook but developments would be limited, instead they would be encouraged over time to move to the 'NG tool'.  Just like we see now with users being encouraged to move to AF instead of MDB.



                                                • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                  Rhys @ RJK Solutions

                                                  so long as they don't bring back the "Rt" branding


                                                  No worries, Rhys, we are sticking with PI as our branding.


                                                  Thanks to all of you contributing to this thread. I find it constructive and helpful.

                                                  • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                    Rhys @ RJK Solutions

                                                    I would still like to believe that one day we will see the PI data server and PI AF as a single product - in the way PI & MDB were/are one.


                                                    Indeed. This is also my wish/believe. But we have to consider that the current efforts are not based on that assumption. We have still have to consider the non-AF customers IMO.


                                                    Rhys @ RJK Solutions

                                                    That said, customers not using AF...well we know they are missing out


                                                    True that! But sometimes it is hard to convince a customer of the added value compared to the investment. A lot of issues can be resolved in PI (using ACE/PE). This makes for a less optimal solution, but the investment is far less.


                                                    I personally don't agree to this, and think AF is an optimal solution to a lot of issues.


                                                    Rhys @ RJK Solutions

                                                    Let's say a company has PI and PHD, both heavily used.  (...) I have a vision in my head of the application, which is hard to explain at times because my head is so busy!


                                                    I like that example. And that's a vision I share.


                                                    Same here, I have a ton of idea's about this subject, but I find it hard to explain it so that vCampus & OSIsoft get the basic idea. Maybe I should put more effort in it





                                                      • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                        On the topic of what formats/symbols/graphics should be supported, it would be great if the NextGen tool could have import functionality so a graphics from various systems can be imported (converted) directly to AF via plugins - it would mean you don't have to automate symbols, just add required configuration data to AF.


                                                        (I hope the guys from DSS don't read this and come beat me up)



                                        • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                          I thought that I would throw in my two cents worth.


                                          IMHO the primary purpose of the client is to visualise the data; creating displays and dashboard. Processbook also has a secondary function of modelling. Currently Processbook does a good job but it is showing its age; which is an issue with our operations when you switching from another system.


                                          Feature I would like to see in a “new” client (I’m going to call it PBNG (ProcessBook Next Generation) for now):


                                          1)     General requirements:


                                          a.     Maintainability across the organisation. The system must be easy to maintain particularly as there are literally thousands of users across our company. Therefore one of the features I would like is an update service for both the core application and for the add-ins. This could also be achieved via Microsoft’s SUS


                                          b.     There should be a thick and thin client; i.e. the thick client is installed on your computer and the thin client is accessed via a website. The thin client should require a minimum installation, preferably none at worst something like Silverlight. The thick and thin client must work seamlessly with each other; although the thin client will have limitation.


                                          c.     I like the ability to have multiple displays with a piw file. However, the current book metaphor is starting to look very dated. A tree view (aka  windows folder type view) would be nicer. I would be nice if this treeview could be linked to AF.


                                          d.     I would be nice to be able to cut and past trends/graphics from PBNG to other applications such as Word and Excel; in my opinion these don’t have to be live


                                          2)     Design environment


                                          a.     I like the split between the build and run function. However this has probably been the biggest issue with users; I’ve had numerous phone calls and emails from the ops saying that PB doesn’t work only to discover that they can add a point because they’re in run mode of they can’t pan the trends because they’re in build mode. I think that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages so I would keep the run and build mode.


                                          b.     The current symbols (trends, graphics, ...) look a little chunky by today’s standards. I would like to see these polished up.


                                          c.     I would like to see the symbols be a bit more like webparts; let call them PBParts. However unlike webpart pages I would like the design canvas to be more free form not zones.


                                          d.     I would like to connect the PBParts together; similar to the webpart connections. Unlike MOSS/SP I would like the connections to be graphical (only displayed in design mode). As an example I could build a display with a time range picker then link this picker to all the other PBParts. I believe that this would remove a good chunk of the current VBA code requirements.


                                          e.     The current graphics symbols are looking a bit dated. It’s also extremely frustrating to find symbols and then even more frustrating that I can’t add symbols to the library. I believe that the entire graphics symbol system needs to be redone; possibly use some of the concepts from Visio.


                                          f.      As I’ve mentioned Visio it would be nice to import a P&ID/PFD from Visio; a lot of our mets use Visio for drawing PFDs.


                                          g.     Layer. Yes I know PB current has layers. I would like to see layers continue; possibly in the same sort of vane as Visio layers


                                          h.     Subdisplays. The though here is that it would be nice to assign subdisplays to PBParts. If you’ve ever used Gensym (now Versata) G2 you will have come across subworkspaces. What I have in mind is that you could assign a subworkspace to an element which would contain details of that element. As an example if I assigned a subworkspace to a pump when I double click on it in run mode it displays a pop up of the pumps details; or whatever else I’ve built. It would be nice if I could assign multiple subworkspaces to an element and then make one of them the default; the others would be menu options (right click context menu). It would also be nice (if not a must) that the subworkspaces could be templates; i.e. I create a standard pump details subworkspace which gets updated with the pumps specifics at build or runtime.


                                          i.      A table object would be really nice to have.


                                          3)     Graphs/Charts:


                                          a.     The current trend symbol is a bit clunky. It would be nice to have more control over these trend objects particularly in the manner in which it displays the time access.


                                          b.     I would be nice to have more chart options:


                                                                                    i.    Trends


                                                                                   ii.    Bar graphs; both stacked and unstacked


                                                                                  iii.    Bubble charts


                                                                                  iv.    X-y scatter plots


                                                                                   v.    3-D x-y scatter plots


                                                                                  vi.    Surface plots.


                                                                                 vii.    This list goes on. I would start by taking a look at excel and implementing a subset of those. People know Excel and that’s what they want.


                                                                                viii.    Composite chart would be nice; e.g. a combined bar and trend.


                                          c.     I would like the silly 12 pen limit on trends removed.


                                          d.     A cursor difference plugin would be nice


                                          4)     AF Integration


                                          a.     I would like the integration into AF to be tighter. I really think that AF should be a first class citizen of the client rather than an add on. The same goes for the modelling add on.


                                          b.     If possible I would like to see a single client rather than the current two client; PB for visualisation and PI System Explorer for building.


                                          c.     It would be nice to store standard displays within the AF database.


                                          d.     It would be nice if AF could appear as an OLAP cube within the client. This would require that the dimensions and measure are define somewhere.


                                          5)     Deployment


                                          a.     We deploy PB displays in a number of way:


                                                                                    i.    File on individuals computers


                                                                                   ii.    Shared network driver


                                                                                  iii.    MOSS/SP document library


                                                                                  iv.    RTGraphic Webpart


                                          b.     The first two are easy although I would like to see more functionality related to multi user editing


                                          c.     The MOSS document library. I would like more functionality in terms of the document meta data which would assist searching.


                                          d.     The current RTGraphic Webpart is anything but a seamless deployment particularly in terms of scaling of the display. This really need to improve.


                                          6)     Scripting


                                          a.     VBA is officially dead from MS. However, I don’t see it disappearing in the near future.


                                          b.     In terms of scripting I would like to add code to the individual elements; basically treat them as objects and extend their functionality.


                                          c.     It would be nice to be able to create script libraries. Similar to MS xla files.


                                          d.     Scripts must be able to run on the web thin clients. It would be really useful to add code behind to the displays on a portal.


                                          7)     Add-ins


                                          a.     The current add in model is clunky (I’ve used that term a lot). I would like the add ins to migrate to .NET with a decent add in manager. The add in should also only load when required rather than when opening the app as this adds delays to the app opening.


                                          8)     Backwards compatibility:


                                          a.     I accept that displays created with PBNG will not run on older versions. However, displays created in older versions will have to run within the new version. This could be handled by a conversion routine when the display is first opened?


                                          9)     App development:


                                          a.     It would be nice to be able to create simple apps within PBNG. For example manual data entry forms and condition based monitoring interfaces. It should be possible to deploy these to a webpage. I realise that the client is not intended to be an application development framework.

                                            • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                              Thank you for your contribution, Michael. (Although, I must say that's got to be more than $.02 worth :-) )


                                              I'm sure you'll be amazed to know that most of these ideas are already incorporated in our long range plans. However, I think it's fair to say that, given the fact that ProcessBook already does many of these things, the inclusion of ProcessBook-like functionality will be a secondary goal for the new product. 


                                              Our primary target for v1 is those activities for which ProcessBook is not currently a good solution. In particular, the sort of ad hoc investigation and analysis that one needs to solve an urgent problem.


                                              I do have some questions about your ideas, if you'd be willing to elaborate.


                                              You noted that it would be ideal to have both a thin client and a desktop client. Can you explain why?


                                              I'm also wondering at the need for Excel-like charts, if you juxtapose that with the request to copy and paste symbols into Office apps. Why not just use the existing functionality in Office? What additional value do bar charts bring to a live, updating data display?




                                              Laurie Dieffenbach


                                              OSIsoft Product Manager

                                                • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                  In light of this discussion, I would like to ask you guys (specially John and Laurie) to have a look at my pet project showcased here.

                                                    • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                      Hi Michael,




                                                      I had a look at your showcase. It represents some deep thinking and hard work on your part. For the majority of PI users, though, I think the notion of building something (no matter how quick and convenient) in C# is not an option. The focus of our new product is to make it extremely straightforward for users to start visualizing data using built-in components (not something they have to create with code).


                                                      The focus of our efforts, I would say, is providing the kinds of visualization (out of the box) that help users investigate and identify issues exposed by PI data in a highly optimized data retrieval environment. So, much of our focus is on providing the fastest access to PI data and intelligent ways to organize that data into something meaningful for a given type of visualization (trends, tables, charts, etc.). Extensibility will come, but not in the first round.


                                                      Thanks for the preview of your work!





                                                        • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                          Laurie, thanks for your reply.


                                                          I have replied to you in the showcase thread, in order to get the discussion in one place.

                                                          • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                            Laurie Dieffenbach

                                                            The focus of our efforts, I would say, is providing the kinds of visualization (out of the box) that help users investigate and identify issues exposed by PI data in a highly optimized data retrieval environment. So, much of our focus is on providing the fastest access to PI data and intelligent ways to organize that data into something meaningful for a given type of visualization (trends, tables, charts, etc.). Extensibility will come, but not in the first round.



                                                            Was this what the "click once, do more" slides shown at the UC were depicting?  The mockups looked good...



                                                              • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                                Rhys @ RJK Solutions

                                                                Was this what the "click once, do more" slides shown at the UC were depicting?  The mockups looked good...


                                                                Wait, OSIsoft had a presentation about the NG visualisation tool? Is there any way I can get that presentation (ppt/video) ?

                                                                • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                                  Yep, Brian was providing a little teaser at the UC.... The product is in development and a few customers were invited to get a preview and provide some feedback. Generally, the response was positive, but there are still those who expect it to replace ProcessBook right out of the gate. Since that would take a much longer development cycle, we've pretty much decided that the process graphics done in ProcessBook will be a version 2 goal, not version 1. On the other hand, we plan to build in some nice integration between the new product and other client tools, so that one can launch the new tool from one of the existing tools.

                                                                    • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                                      That sounds good.


                                                                      I've spoken with John and Matt about joining in a program for the NextGen tool. I haven't heard back from them.


                                                                      We are really interested in seeing and getting more information about this new product. Can you arrange this? (including screen mockups).

                                                                        • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                                          What Matt was alluding to earlier in the thread was a discussion about hosting a forum on vCampus to discuss this topic with Tom and the project team. I don't have firm plans about that yet, but it is being actively discussed. John and Matt (and Tom) will contact those who are interested when we have an actionable plan in place. In the meantime, I don't have materials that are available for sharing. Sorry.

                                                                          • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft

                                                                            Michael and all,


                                                                            Brian hinted at our visualization project in the keynote, although what we showed there was UI prototypes, not actual screen shots.   We also had an invite only session for customers that gave them a preview of the new tool to get feedback that we can incorporate directly into the project.   These sessions went very well and were focused on end users who have been working with us on improving our UI products.   We intend to have a follow up session for partners as well, and would be happy to get you guys involved in that session, which may be even before vCampus Live!.


                                                                            Let's move this discussion to a single place in vCampus so that we can track it and get all of the appropriate people involved.  Tom Hosea is the Product Manager for this product, and Laurie and I are on the product owner team helping to shape it and position it with all of our other client products.



                                                                              • Re: New Visualization Efforts at OSIsoft



                                                                                Thank you so much! I'm sure a lot of vCampus members love to get involved in a discussion surrounding this topic. Maybe it is too early to open up a subforum for this topic, also because there is not much information available to vCampus at this moment. Maybe when there is more information, a subforum to discuss this topic would be appropriate. In the meantime maybe this topic will do?