MS Project Vs Primavera

Each has its advatages and disadvantages. MS project is relatively easy to use unlike P3 and older versions were relatively cheep, especially when compared to the cost of P3 and the maintenance contract. However I am lead to believe that Microsoft is changing its licensing and the enterprise version of MS Project 2002 will be much more expensive.

Im not sure If anyone has done a write up of sort comparing P3 and MS Project.

I have been a user of both products for 7 years now and below are some of my personal view on the matter.

1. Both are effective scheduling softwares.
2. MS Project is more user friendly in terms of data inputing especially entering resource data.
3. P3 is more powerful in terms of transferring data and in organizing data. It gives you a wide latitude in terms of reporting features.
4. Depending on the extent of Project Management consciousness in your company, I believe P3 is suited to a company which is very mature. But for not so extensive and not so complex projects, MSP can do the job as well.

Just this for now.

Se

I have been a user of MSP for over 5 years and is currently swithcing to P3. MSP was much easier to handle since I was already familar with MS Office. But the switch to P3 was really tough for me, as I continued with the mindset of MSP.But alas, its easier now with alot of patience and of course with the help of 1 book written by Leslie Feigenbaum. I am the type who like to do self study and working in a small construction companies where the bosses do not believe in sending the staff for training. Having known P3 for 6 months, I feel that P3 is much more "exciting, intelligent, mature, illustrative, dynamic and informative". Whats more in my country, P3 seems to be the elite and in planner/scheduler vacancies, knowledge of P3 is a must.

I note the comments vs P3. Has anybody got similar comparative experience of Open Plan (OPP and OPD) versus MSP. I suspect similar comments to that registered for P3, but that is not the same as knowing.

Also any comments of Artemis Views versus MSP.

thank you

Major difference between P3 and MSP are;
- P3 you can have 2 baseline whereas in MSP you have only 1.
- P3 can handle more complex data compared to MSP.
- P3 doesnot restrict you for relationships, you can use FS, SS, SF and FF and combination of all, but try the combination in MSP simply not possible.
- P3 is also fairly easy to use as is MSP. Now, the connectivity with Excel, Access and oracle is excellent. People find MSP easy because of its connectivity with other MSoffice products.

Imtiyaz, you are mostly correct about Baseline Schedules.

In P3, you can have as many Baseline Schedules as you wish. You can only report against two at the same time.

More importantly for a Scheduler, MS Project does not have a real data date (or status date.) Without this, all data measurements are meaningless.

Thank you very much for the comments ref MSP versus P3. I suspect the same comments would be made for Open Plan. Can anybody confirm this please? I have always felt the absence of a proper "Timenow" function is MSP is very limiting. Have this been fixed in MSP 2002?

Any comments on how P3, Open Plan compare with Artemis Views?

I feel this discussion is very useful. Hope other Planning Planet members think so.

Ref MSP Baselines, in MSP2000 it is possible to create up to 10 baselines in the same programme file by using the Tools Tracking Baseline facility, then using the "Save Interim Plan" option. The various Start/Finish date titles can be customised to ensure no confusion arises when trying to save information.

I have used this method to save 6 different baseline plans from various stages of a project. By formatting the bars within the Gantt chart area, it is possible to set up comparisons between the current programme and any of the Interim Plan dates.

Hope this helps.

Tony,

About those 10 saved, interm baseline schedules; are you saving just the dates or are you also saving the relationship, constraint, cost, and resource information as it existed at the time that the interm scheduled was saved?

Without this information, all you have is a nice barchart that proves nothing. Dates are meaningless unless you can show that conditions producing those dates were the same.

Ronald,

As you note, the MSP interim baseline will only save start/ finish dates. Relationships and constraints will be taken into account when the dates are saved, but as you note, if subsequently changed will not be readily visible. However, it is still useful to give a "visual" indication of progress against interim target schedule.

P3 does enable all of the data to be compared, although the price for this is having to retain all the target programmes.

Having used both MSP and P3, I must admit a preference to P3 as it requires a much more "structured" manner of working as opposed to MSP.

A white paper has been posted about this on the Gantthead.com website, look in the Discussions/Project Management Central/MS Project 2002 -vs- Primavera P3e Will

MS project is very easy to use but P3 is very complexity.
I Think the most different between MSP and P3 is Resource management for Bulk material. In the MSP this is not item for bulk material.

Hi Mehdi,

What do you mean by Bulk material?

Using MSP is quite easy as compared to P3. Some of the features I like with MSP are the ff:
1. Resource usage view - wherein you can edit your resource quantities in the timescaled view while in P3 you have to use export feature and you can use a copy paste command to transfer your data to excel.
2. Task usage view - you can immediately see and edit the resource assignments per task. Theres need to open a dialogue box to see and edit it and you can also print this view. You can also copy paste it to excel.

In P3, the resource curves are easily seen and quite effective tool, in MSP you cant stack your resources which is very important in analyzing resources and cost. The ID feature is good because you can produce an ID structure which is automatic,useful and meaningful. While MSP has a formula fields, global change of P3 is still very powerful. The open end report is very effective.

At the minimum, the features Ive mentioned should be integrated to one software. Im sure there are many others still but I will leave that to others to post in this forum.

Regards to everybody.

Se

How about a comparison between Astas Teamplan vs MS Projects.

Hi there,
If you worked on huge Project with powerful resource management you need Primavera certainly
take care

PPers,

Have you all seen this forum topic on the subject of comparing planning packages?

http://www.planningplanet.com/forum/forum_post.asp?fid=&Cat=1&Top=2054

The thing that I find amazing is that any scheduler/planner would even want to compare MS Projects with Primavera or for that matter compare MSP with any scheduling program because MS Projects in not scheduling program. Who cares that you can have 10 baselines? If you doing 10 baselines you not scheduling you doing presentations and that is the one and only thing MS Projects is good for, putting together a good looking bar chart for a presentation (PFPs) and now with MS Projects 2002 you can’t easily move a MS Project into Primavera making totally worthless. Without the ability to have a data date and have the logic drive future activities Projects is worthless. It is not a CMP scheduling program it might be Project Management software (I don’t think so) or even a fancy To-Do List but the one thing it is not and that is scheduling program. If you want a scheduling program stick with Primavera or Open Plan [the rest of this comment was deleted by the Moderator due to offensiveness.]

I have to disagree. MSP is useless for presentation purposes

Can you explain why MSP is useless for presentation. "MSP has no data date" - Please check on how to status in MSP. I use the Current Date or Status date. "MSP has no logic that drives future activities" - You can do this by updating the schedule then click the reschedule task options. What is CMP? If I understand it right it sounds as Critical Path Method. You can filter the activities in MSP just like in P3. Make no mistake about this, I am not an avid fan of MSP Im just clarifying matters pertaining to the previous posts. I dont blame planners who have worked first with P3 because I had the same view three years ago. My suggestion, buy an MSP book and explore. Regards to all. Se

I agree with rex,you can also use the drawing tools in MSP to create a better presentation,but in terms of complex performance of planning software P3 is still ahead than MSP.

Regarding presentation purposes.....

My personal opinion is that an MSP gantt looks amateurish in a presentation - I always will create excel to create a summary for presentation purposes

I feel for beginners MSP is better than P3. It is like learning swiming in a pool before swiming in the ocean.

MSP has some features which are beginner freindly - like the "undo" button which is missing in P3. The undo key helps the beginner to retrace his steps if any mis take is made. This is not so with P3.

IMHO MSP is the worse thing that has happened to planning since it all started! It has enabled inexperienced people to use a planning tool and assume, because they can drive it, they know everything there is about planning.

It akin to giving a calculator to child, showing him how to work it and then calling him/herself a mathematician.

Because MSP is so cheap, user friendly, and on first appearance is a complete package the biggest companies have been misguided into buying it as the corporate tool.
This has led to an influx of people calling themselves so-called planners where in truth they are nothing more than data-input clerks.

I agree with many of the comments from our Forum Guest. Because MSP is percieved as being user friendly then people dont need training and hence become Planners by default as companies give people MSP and tell them they are Planners. This has not helped raise the Professionalism of Planners. It has to an extent created many MSP "software junkies" as distinct from real Planners.

On the other hand the later versions of MSP, up to MSP 2000 (I have not seen later versions in anger) do now appear to offer the more traditional functionality of what I would call proper planning tools. However at this level of use I find MSP is less than user friendly and requires an in depth knowledge of the functionality, which is in the main not intuitive, but on the otherhand does make MSP a more serious Planning tool.

In other words You are both correct in your views. To me the key in being to Plan is not toolset, but Planning knowldge, the tools only automate what a good planner can do with " a sheet of paper and a pencil". Only once this knowledge is mastered should one be let loose on a toolset. A real experienced Planner should really be toolset independant.

Hi All I have used P3 since about 1987 now and still think it is the software to use. At the moment the client has insisted that we use MS Project. I run MSP 2000 and have found ways to get round some of the problems in MSP. Outline Codes can be set up and although they are a bit painful to maintain they do work and allow you to seup reports Grouped by codes the same way as P3 uses the coding structure. This gets around my main problem of the felxibility in reporting as most MSP schedule are set up with a fixed report and battle to give different views for example grouping all discipline etc. The reports I issue look like P3 reports and dont have those summary bars etc resulting in a much more proffesional report. I still hate the resourcing side, in P3 I would use resources to produce S-Curves in Excel. In MSP I have yet to find a way that doesnt mess you around by either changing the resourse or the duration if you modify the schedule, you have to constantly switch between fixed duration/units. I am trying to convince the client to switch to P3.

Sorry Message below is from me

John,

I am very much in agreement with you ref resourcing in P3 versus MSP. MSP is good at the simplistic level, but can get very frustrating at a more complex level of use. I would suggest that it actually becomes very user un-friendly at such levels of complexity in relation to tools such as P3 and Open Plan Professional (OPP). One feature that I find useful in P3 and have not seen elswhere in such a simple manner are resource thresholds, which are excellent for allowing a Planner to be able to model the potential affects of applying overtime.

Regards

Guy

Let’s talk value for money.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that you are a P3 and MSP proficient planner and that you really need to buy a planning software out from your "own" pocket, would you buy P3/P3ec in favor of MSP?

Hi, Sorry for the delay. Well that is one question that I can answer very honestly as I did just that, I bought P3 out of my own pocket to be able to provide a better service.

However I must admit that at the time MSP was much worse than it is today and it was impossible to work with. MSP has improved a lot and I now use it just like it was P3 and have some flexibility in reporting.

If faced with the same decision Now I would like to think that I would still buy P3. Even though more clients would like me to use MSP. P3 as far as I am concerned would pay for itself over 6 months and the clients would not be able to play with the plan themselves which is my biggest pet hate with MSP.

PS. MSP is getting more expensive with every release.

MSP and P3 are not in the same league so it is pointless to try a comparison.
Value for money? Well it is a fact of life that you get what you pay for in most cases.
MSP may have its uses in certain situations but there are many planning software packages that better then MSP from complexibility in its ability to handle resourse / cost data and ease of use, but it may cost you a little more.
Value for money is not the cost of buying the package but in it being able to do what you require of it at the minimum cost!
Daya

Mike

You are correct in your observation, this is just one of the many issues I have with Microsoft Project.

To find the driving predecessor I usually delete one relationship at a time untill the task I amd looking at moves.

Hopefully someone else may have a better technique for you.

Regards

Paul E Harris
Eastwood Harris Pty Ltd

I hate this part of MS Project and have sent several emails to MS Project asking them to add this feature. Even if the showed the date fields or TF of pred/succ it would help.

What I have done is I use the Window Split and show Pred/Succ Relationships then you can double click on any of the Pred/Succ and they will pop up in a seperate window (the normal window you get if double clicking on a task) Then you can look at the dates and figure out which is driving. It is a real pain in the butt though with a large network.

I entirely agree.

I find in a reasonably large network, say 200+ activities the only quick and easy way to find the critical activities is to transfer the MSP programme to a more capable planning tool. Where I work I don’t have access to P3, so I transfer into Open Plan. It’s a problem for those without access to more powerful tools.

It makes you wonder where Microsoft get Planning advice from as to what functionality is required in their product?

Hi all

I just found this great site. I am an an engineer who has been using PC planning tools for over 20 years. The simple fact about MS project is that it is not robust enough to use in serieous large scale planning of commercial projects. In fact you put your company and project at risk by using it. Like many of you I have found over the years soem of the inconsistnecies with the program and have tackled Microsoft about these issues. The response has alway been "we dont care, the primavera and serious large scale project market is small and we are not interested in it, we are not competing with Primavera !!"

So if you are hoping for improvements, you are likely to wait a long time. The people who used to make a product called Micro planner have documented for years the inaccuracies in MS projects Critical path calculations.

If you are working on projects which may end up in comeercil dispute over critcal patha nd extensions of time etc DONT USE MS PROJECT, you will be laughed out of court and risk loosing your company lots of money.

Godo Luck every body.If any one has any comments please feel free.

Tom

The people who used to make a product called Micro planner have documented for years the inaccuracies in MS projects Critical path calculations.

Hi Tom, is this info on-line? Could you provide a link?

Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems Inc. - Project Management Software, Project Planning Software

Bernard
I have ahtrd copy form some time ago. I believe microplanner is still going it might be called Xpert. I thnik they have a site. I will look.
cheers

Bernard

Here is their web site
http://www.decisivetools.com.au/xpert.htm

I ma sure if you contact them they would love to give you their test results.

I reiterate that there is not much chance of MSP changeing the marketing philosphy oof Microsoft is to move volumes boxes and not compete with Primavera small market.

tom

Could you please explain a little bit on the inaccurcies you’re referring to. I’m sure many out there are very much interested in tackling this issue in this thread.

yes as long as you declare who you are first !

I very much agree with many of the sentiments expressed. MSP is a mass market product. At one Sales presentation Microsoft said that was the case. They were targeting the product at people who wanted no more than 100 activities, but as Sales men they would sell MSP to anyone!

I have found out various quirks with the tool, only to be told that "is a feature". I think MSP call any thing we may call a bug a Feature! I always took this to be a difference in the use of UK English and US English language! or should I say Microsoft English?

The one thing I find in common with previous postings in this thread is that many of us are working for people/ companies who at times seem to think MSP is the best thing in Planning tools. I think Microsoft have done an excellent selling job. To us Planners we need to educate and challenge those we plan for to understand that different tools suit different applications. It is not a one size fits al1. That is the real challenge for us Planners.

We have used MSP and P3 for a number of years - MSP for front end programme development and P3 for the ’live’ programme. The discipline necessary to run P3 is not required for MSP, the down side of this is that PM beginners might assume the role of planning guru with little on no knowledge of ’real’ planning.

PMI has recently chartered a Scheduling Practice Standard Team to develop the new PMI Scheduling Practice Standard. Maybe they will define what a SchedulingPlanning software should be or at least state that it must follow the mathematical CPM schedule modal.

My experience with MS Projects is that it violates the basic rules that would define a CPM schedule, especially when updating a schedule. I can’t believe that in MS Projects you can update and status a schedule and activities that have not started still show up left of the data or status date. MS might be able to go back in time and complete work but us mortal humans can’t. Now I know that there is work around for this problem but why should there need to be a work around for something as basic as if you don’t do it then the logic should drive it from the data date or status date.

If PMI does a good job of defining what a schedule should be, maybe we can drive a stake in the heart of MS Project as a scheduling program and clients will finely understand that MS Projects is not to be used program and or project scheduling.

We should never let Microsoft define what a CPM schedule should be.

I read all the replies, but I did not found a point, that I consider important.
In MS Project is not possible to follow the activities on the critical path, in such easy as P3.

There are other points, but I think this one is the most important as I will have hard time to identify the activity that must be crashed.

There are various ways to identify critical path activities.

The most obvious is to enter ’bar styles’ (right click on gantt) and create new name/shape/colour (usually red) and in Show for....Tasks type critical

Luca,

The problem is not just being able to ‘follow the critical path.’ What if the program says that an activity is critical when another CPM program says that it is not? It will not help to be able to read the software if the software is wrong.

P3, SureTrak, and P3e (and I suppose Artimis and other CPM software packages) compute the CPM differently than MS Project does. The fact that MS Project does not use a data date by default and computes it one of several ways when you do use the data date virtually ensures that MS Project will calculate complicated in-progress schedules differently than all of the rest.

If MS Project is different, can it be correct and all of the others are wrong? The answer is No; not if you understand classical CPM theory.

Ok can You explain me the big difference they can have as the theory, as You observed, of the CPM calculation (forward and backward steps) should works the same!
Or there are different methods to estimate the early and late dates from the activities durations and relationship?

The difference in how P3 and Ms Project are managing days, as I saw, is that P3 consider the next day, as Ms Project not.
From this You can have some differences.

But How You can be sure 100% that a path is critical, as You assign a deterministic duration and a deterministic logic?
Which is the level of Your confidence?

But we are moving the discussion on other topics (some of which are still research.

I stumbled upon this website through this thread because I keep having problems with my client’s (or their client’s) insistance that MSP does all scheduling. I was actually trying to find an add-in software that I thought I’d found a couple of years ago (2001-2002) that would give you a scheduling report a la P3’s scheduling report. I’d downloaded it, and I think I actually ran a couple of demonstration reports for my client at that time.... I can’t find it now. The downloaded demo died when my laptop hard drive crashed... I also have used the Critical Tools add-ins WBS and PERT to review schedules and their paths, but I, who understand P3 and SureTrak pretty well, end up frustrated (upset to the point of anger) when trying to work with MSP. They’ve added in so many pre-set algorithms that are invisible to the scheduler. These can easily, and inextricably, mix something that should be repeatable and demonstrable when project task and project end dates are seen and published. Paul Harris’ MSP book does help point out what to remove! But there are no features there that can replicate classical CPM methodology.

Can someone give me details on Paul Harris’ book
Publisher etc.

You will find information about my books on my web site, link below, including some sample chapters.

I supply the books in paperback and spiral bound. Spiral bound is great for learning as they lie flat on the desk.

The books are also available in paperback format only from the following places:
www.bestpmbooks.com
www.amazon.com
www.computermanuals.co.uk
www.amazon.co.uk

Paul E Harris
Eastwood Harris Pty Ltd
Planning and Scheduling Book Publishers
www.eh.com.au

Philp

I think you been out of contact with the software provider.
They had already decided not to have any major development on P3 since it is build in a outdated db structure. Their plan is to replace the product with another similar package call P3e or Teamplay or P3e/c where it is a more powerful package with min. if you wanted to use it on your schedule.

BTW, the also have the ability to identify and track each step within the min. if you intend to do such detail planning on your project. The only question of what’s the benefit of such detail planning??