FTView SE Local or Network

I have a upcoming project where the customer wants ControLogix with RSlogix V20, FTView SE 6.1, and a panel view 10" not sure of the exact part number on the panel view yet. They also said they wanted a Prosoft Modbus TCP/IP to interface with there existing network.
I'm not sure what type of project to setup in FTView SE Network or local? I mean I understand the difference in general terms between network and local but just not sure how it applies to FTView. Do I have to use network for the panel view (I know the panel view needs ME which I have)? There will only be the 1 desktop with 1 monitor and the panel view 10".
I was thinking of setting it up as network which would allow them to add clients in the future if they wanted?

Thanks,
Matt

The PanelView does not use FT View SE. It uses FT View ME. Perhaps the client has them mixed up, can you provide more detail on exactly what they have specified?

OG

Operaghost said:

The PanelView does not use FT View SE. It uses FT View ME. Perhaps the client has them mixed up, can you provide more detail on exactly what they have specified?

OG

Click to expand...

Yes I understand panel view uses ME. The only spec the customer has is 1 desktop windows 7pro with 1 monitor running FTView SE 6.1 located in thier lab and a 10" panel view located localy at the equipment.

I would just run a live session of FactoryTalk SE local on that computer.

Have you looked at viewpoint for future expandability? Do you want future users to have a read/write or read-only setup?

-Josh

JoshM said:

I would just run a live session of FactoryTalk SE local on that computer.

Have you looked at viewpoint for future expandability? Do you want future users to have a read/write or read-only setup?

-Josh

Click to expand...

I did look at viewpoint but it does not list windows 7 as a supported OS for the server.

So, Local is the answer then if everything is happening on that one PC. If the customer decides later that they want additional client machines, it can be converted to a network application.

Just wanted to be sure you realized that the application for the PanelView would be separate from the FT View SE application.

ViewPoint might be a better route, and version 2 supports Windows 7. Also, Safari, and Chrome were added as supported browsers to go with the already supported IE and Firefox.

http://literature.rockwellautomation.com/idc/groups/literature/documents/pp/ftalk-pp017_-en-p.pdf

OG

If the customer thinks they are only going to have the 1 pc then you can run ME on the pc as well as the panelview you just have to buy the runtime license.

Another option is SE station which is just for 1 pc

Or use SE distributed on the pc and a client license so in effect the pc is the client and server and you can expand this in the future if need be.

Thanks for all your help guys I really appreciate it.
After finally getting a face to face meeting with these guys yesterday they just want a single desktop PC the only spec is a 22" monitor other than that whatever I think is best. It will only be used for control and will not be connected to their internal network so no email, web browsing..etc nor do they ever see adding a client PC. Based on this I will be going with FTView SE Station.

Thanks

MATT116 said:

Thanks for all your help guys I really appreciate it.
After finally getting a face to face meeting with these guys yesterday they just want a single desktop PC the only spec is a 22" monitor other than that whatever I think is best. It will only be used for control and will not be connected to their internal network so no email, web browsing..etc nor do they ever see adding a client PC. Based on this I will be going with FTView SE Station.

Thanks

Click to expand...

The really cool feature of SE is the ability to use ALMD and ALMA for alarms.
It is very efficient, and, IMHO, the way alarms should be done!!

jdbrandt said:

The really cool feature of SE is the ability to use ALMD and ALMA for alarms.
It is very efficient, and, IMHO, the way alarms should be done!!

Click to expand...

I agree, that's how I'm doing it