Choosing digital twin platforms: compare the workflow
Compare digital twin platforms by captured-space viewing, engineering data, integrations, ownership and maintenance, with named Novo project context.
The best digital twin platform depends on the task and data you need. A visual tour, an engineering model and a connected operational system are different deliverables; evaluate the required workflow before comparing product names or subscription tiers.
Which criteria should a digital twin platform comparison use?
Start a digital twin platform comparison with the output your team actually needs. A visitor-facing spatial tour, an engineering information environment and a model connected to operational data require different source information and responsibilities.
Eight criteria for a platform shortlist
| Criterion | Question to resolve before selecting |
|---|---|
| Purpose | Is the priority remote viewing, a proposed design, engineering information or operational data? |
| Inputs | Which photographs, captures, models and asset records are available and approved? |
| Viewing | Can intended visitors use the delivered experience on their devices? |
| Information | Which labels, product data or asset records need an accountable owner? |
| Integration | What systems actually need to connect, and who will build and maintain that connection? |
| Handover | Which files, permissions and administrative access are included? |
| Maintenance | How will changes to the space, information or subscription be handled? |
| Evaluation | Can the supplier demonstrate the required journey using a relevant sample? |
Product categories overlap, but their names do not prove that a commission includes every capability. Microsoft describes Azure Digital Twins as an environment-modelling service; Autodesk describes Tandem around facility and BIM information. Confirm the current terms and integration scope directly before choosing either.
Microsoft Azure Digital Twins overview ↗︎
Bentley iTwin platform overview ↗︎
These vendor references explain categories. Their inclusion is not a claim that Novo delivered an integration with those platforms, nor a ranked recommendation for a particular project.
Key points
- Compare required outputs and available inputs before comparing subscriptions.
- Ask for a relevant demonstration and an explicit handover scope.
- Keep live data and engineering requirements separate from a visual tour brief.
Real Novo projects relevant to this guide
WORQ is a captured Matterport tour; Acacia is an interactive architectural walkthrough. These examples illustrate different outputs, not a ranked endorsement of software or an IoT integration commission.
WORQ KL Sentral — Matterport 3D virtual tour. Review the coworking space before arranging a visit.
Acacia Height — Interactive WebGL walkthrough. An architectural model converted into a self directed walkthrough for desktop and mobile browsers.