An "unbiased" opinion (ya right!)

I thought I would start off the discussions in this new forum with what I personally view as the strengths and weaknesses of Flexsim today (version 4.32). I will start by listing what I feel are Flexsim's greatest strengths compared to the competition, and then I will admit what I feel are Flexsim's greatest weaknesses. Are you more amazed at the fact that Flexsim has weaknesses, or that I'm willing to admit it?

First the strengths of Flexsim:

1. Game Quality Graphics - Flexsim allows you to import standard 3D models as well as create your own animated 3D graphics within the package using a standard graphics language (OpenGL).
2. No Fences - You will never have to throw up your hands and say "Dang, Flexsim can't do that!", because of Flexsim's open architecture and integration with the most powerful programming language available C++. You're not forced to be a C++ programmer because there's also a simple scripting language available, but at those times when you might meet a brick wall with competitive packages, Flexsim gives you a door.
3. Standard Object Library - Flexsim has a very capable library of class objects that can be used right out of the box to build a lot of different models very quickly and quite often with little or no programming required. In addition, the source code for all classes in the library is open to the user to see and use freely.
4. Kinematics - Flexsim's kinematics capability is a very powerful tool for advanced users to be able to create their own complex machine or product motions, and not just animation, but physics-based simulation.
5. TaskExecuters - Flexsim's approach to mobile resources using taskexecuters and the concept of a tasksequence is elegant and extremely powerful. When you have to queue, dispatch and control a complex sequence of movements and coordinated tasks of people and machines, the TaskExecuter object class in Flexsim makes an otherwise insurmountable job doable.
6. Customization - No one compares to the level of customization that Flexsim provides. Flexsim users may create their own classes, libraries, GUIs and entire applications if they so desire. Hardly anything is "off limits" to the user. Flexsim opens up what most competitive products protect as source code. When a user has a question about how it works "under the hood", they can go and take a look.
7. Reusability - Users may save their work in what are called user libraries, and then either reuse it later themselves or share it with others to reduce future model building time.
8. Head Start Objects - The BasicFR, BasicTE and BasicConveyor objects are available in Flexsim to give users who would like to design their own custom objects a head start when creating new object functionality.

Now for the weaknesses of Flexsim:

1. Documentation - Although Flexsim has about 700 pages of online help, it still lacks examples and theoretical explanations. The company simply does not do a good job of telling and showing people all that Flexsim can do. I would be willing to bet there is not a single person inside or outside the company that knows everything Flexsim can do!
2. Training - Very little has been published related to the Flexsim software. You can not buy text books, training videos, etc. about how to use Flexsim. You are somewhat dependant on collegues, Flexsim's own training and technical support, or this Community Forum to get the training and help you might need.
3. Case Studies - Very few true case studies are available with Flexsim to give new users a head start when starting their new model.
4. Software User Interface - It can be difficult to manage all the windows, and to navigate the GUI's within Flexsim. Many of the terms used in the user interfaces are often not intuitive to inexperienced users.
5. Connections - The graphical connections between objects (i.e. input, output and center port connections) can be difficult to create and manage in very large models.

Here's my closing remarks. Flexsim will never have all the modeling objects, and all the software features required to satisfy all the needs and all the wants of every user. It just won't. We knew that when we first designed Flexsim. This is the very reason why we developed such a flexible and powerful product. It's power lies not in its current library set, although there definitely is some power available there. It's power is in the fact that developers and users alike can create any new functionality or custom visualization that they can possibly imagine or have the skills to produce. In other words, Flexsim has No Fences!! We at Flexsim need to make it easier, faster and funner to do through a combination of software development and creative training methods.

I welcome your opinions,

Cliff King
VP Technical Services
Flexsim Software Products.

Yes, Documentation is a big problem. I asked many problems in this forum, and cliff gave me many sollutions. But many techniques of the sollutions are not mentioned in the Documentation. I donn't know why. will you improve in this aspect?

And another improvement I need is statistics function, I think you can enhance it greatly so that users do less work.

Qin Tian,
I don't think you understand the point of this discussion. This discussion isn't just a place to post your gripes and ask Flexsim to fix them. This is meant for Flexsim users to provide other users or potential users with the positives and negatives that they see in the software. If you are going to post here, please post at least one positive. Since you are a Flexsim user yourself, you or your company must have chosen Flexsim over other software for some reason, right? What is that reason or reasons?

We are certainly open to criticism of the software, but this discussion should not devolve into a simple list of things that should be improved in Flexsim (Gripes and Goodies is the place to discuss bugs and suggestions). This discussion is meant to provide people with an overall view of Flexsim, both the good and the bad.

For my part, here is what I think are some strengths and weaknesses of Flexsim, in addition to Cliff's comments:

Strengths:
Active Development - Flexsim is very active in improving and maintaining the software. Each year there are new improvements and features that make the software significantly better, and we try to be very open to feedback from our users.
User Forum - This Flexsim user forum itself is very active and there's a lot of information that can be gleaned here.

Weaknesses:
Ditto on Cliff's Comments - Documentation, Training, Case Studies, User Interface. I agree that there are significant improvements that need to be made there.
Concurrent Model Development - One weakness I have found in a recent project is that Flexsim doesn't have very good tools to help multiple people work on the same project at the same time. I was able to jury-rig my own tool together using user libraries (ditto on Cliff's flexibility advantage), and it was sufficient, but even then it wasn't very user friendly and was prone to errors in some cases.

Sorry, Anthony. Maybe I am not express my idea appriately.

What I want to say is that I like flexsim very much.

At the beginning, I don't understand its advanced function because of its poor document. But when I go deep into it, I find it very powerful and flexible. That's why I say that document is a big problem.

I am more experienced using Witness than I am at using Flexsim. I have several positives and opportunities regarding Flexsim.

Positives

The forum - A place that is obviously very popular with users of al levels and has helped me several times in the past; very quickly.

The 3D graphics - The simulations look fantastic compared to those in 2D.

Basic models are also very easy to put together using the drag and drop method of connecting elements. As stated above this can become awkward with more complex models.

Opportunties

Documentation and standardisation - Flexsim appears so powerful that you can do anything, which can be a problem sometimes when you aren't so experienced, it would be nice to be directed down a particular route more clearly by the structure of the program rather than needing to know how to write a great deal of code.

I also find that becasue the graphics are so good it often makes the simulations more difficult as people expect to see the process exactly the same on the screen as it is in real life. Hence it is important to choose the right tool for the job or simulate at the correct level of detail. Do you just want an answer to a problem? (In which case graphics aren't important). Or do you want the simulation to look like the process? (In which case you can spend a great deal of time making it look nice).

Anth

I would like to share my thoughts on Flexsim (currently on Version 5.1.2) so far..

Good things
· 3D-interface
My feeling is that traditionally DES has seen and used as a powerful tool for statistical analysis on the impact on a KPI of a policy change. With the 3D support that Flexsim offers it enables for other opportunities such as increasing the understanding of your system and the interaction of the subsystems (one thing is knowing that the change will mean a change in a KPI with X % with Y % confidence, but another thing is being able to see how the system will react and interact to the change), training and vertical start up of an implementation.
· Customisation of objects
I find it very good being able to develop objects that resembles the process in your facility
· Possibilities
Connected to the above, but so far my experience is that Flexsim (compared to other DES-tools) offer almost any possibility for simulation and it is ultimately down to the developer to set the limit.
· Forum
Great support and for “free”!

Less good things
· Documentation
Even though some of the functions are documented in the user manual some still need to be better documented. Also documentation of success stories, like how have companies successfully used Flexsim/simulation
· Price
I am not responsible for license purchases so I really don’t know about price levels, but I am guessing that with a powerful tool price increase also, which could make it difficult for a smaller company to invest in a license and instead continue with spreadsheet simulation.
· Vision of next generation simulation
I am missing a bit (maybe forum and/or portal) with those crazy ideas of how simulation/Flexsim can evolve in the future, like including human factors, agent-based model etc (just throwing out some buzz-words in the air)

/Sebastian

· Price
I am not responsible for license purchases so I really don’t know about price levels, but I am guessing that with a powerful tool price increase also, which could make it difficult for a smaller company to invest in a license and instead continue with spreadsheet simulation.

@Sebastian

So you don´t know the price of a license but think it´s to expensive!?
As a hint for Software companys: what do you think would be a good solution for this? Or did you mean something else?

I did a bit of market research about a year ago when the company I'm working for thought about buying the full license and I can assure that - even from a neutral point of view - Flexsim offers the best cost-benefit ratio on the market. And still the total price is quite a bargain compared to other simulation software.

Besides that, here a my pros and cons (which haven't been mentioned already):

Pros:
- Intuitive concept, good documentation to get started (excellent tutorials in my opinion) and thus a relative short training period
- Direct modeling in 3D environment - no waste of time by first creating a 2D model for functionality and then a 3D version for eye-candy

Cons:
- Only available in English - which might discourage some potential costumers to working with Flexsim. Althought personally I think this shouldn't be a barrier anymore in these days