serial no, lot no, CU management

NavStudent

Hello
Serial and Lot No a great feature in Navision. A lot of companies use them. For go live, I have always create a routine to populate reservation entry manually. It's not really a good idea to populate these tables directly because there are way too many fields in that table.
Same applies if you insert serial no for a Sales order, transfer line, purchase line.
Why hasn't Navision created a codeunit that has simple functions? Like
Insert serial no for this journal line. Insert Lot no.
That way the CU can do all the necessary checking, before it inserts, and it's guaranteed that will be put correctly.
Why should everybody reinvent the wheel?
Plus there is no documentation on this table so it only makes sense to have a codeunit for the table.
Maybe I'm missing something?

NavStudent

I guess I am not.

DenSter

You're asking unanswerable questions. Most people in here don't know why, and the ones that do won't tell because it's not relevant or because they're bound by some sort of NDA.

You can ask about each and every piece of functionality why they did not implement it differently, but what good does that do? Things are implemented the way they are implemented because it was decided that was the best or the easiest or whatever.

If you think you have an improvement over the standard functionality, maybe a much more useful way to spend your time is consider creating an add-on and marketing your product.

ayhan06

i think item tracking is really coded as good as it must be..
two or three days ago,i wrote this post. http://www.mibuso.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20397

think of item tracking window.. all the lot serial information is taken from user, they populate a temporary record, and then they are written to the database.. it is same as the way you want to implement.. isnt it?so usefull codes are in the item tracking window...at first glance, the lines of code can be hard to understand but not as hard as you can not understand..

so you should first try to understand "which way will make functions usefull in all of the system".. i think navision is written in this way.. just explore in it..

idiot

I have been asking these kind of questions, both myself & by my clients.

The very root of the problem is that Navision is an evolved software, inheriting system logic/coding of the past century.
During that time the system was simple & as it evolves it get more complex, but the codes are retained.
However, the codes might not be optimized with the new functionalities & also previous versions' logics have to be retained so that upgrading is possible.

Bearing this in mind, everything can be explained.

The challenge is now for you to synchronize Navision workflow with your client's as seamlessly as possible.

DenSter

NAV is just a software package. If the processes in a company that purchases NAV doen't match the application logic in NAV, that does not mean that the logic in NAV is flawed. It simply means that the processes are different. This is the reason why there is 'requirements gathering' and 'analysis' steps in any implementation, to discover where and to what extent NAV logic fits the customer's business logic.

Why some people in here are hellbent on calling this 'oldfashioned' or 'wrong' is beyond me. Every single computer application has this to some extent. You can write a brand new ERP app now, and it will immediately be 'wrong' for other companies, simply because they do things differently. There's nothing wrong with that, it's natural.

Another thing is when you, as a NAV consultant, walk into a customer's office and start saying how bad the product is, you're not really helping, it does not address their issue. If their sales posting is missing a step, don't start knocking the whole syste, but help them fix the sales posting.

idiot

There are system analysts, programmers, technical consultants, functional consultants, navision consultants, erp consultants, project managers...
Each individual has their objectives & requirements...
There is nothing wrong with saying a system is old or new...
Would you consider Nav 3.6 old compared to 5.0?
Then would you consider the same codings old in Nav 3.6 since its still used on 5.0 where there are new functions in 5.0 & the codings could have been optimized but apparently not?
Would you consider Nav 3.6 old compared to DOS Nav?
It really depends on one's perspective...
Friendly discussion...