Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- All Categories
- 73 General
- 73 Announcements
- 66.6K Microsoft Dynamics NAV
- 18.7K NAV Three Tier
- 38.4K NAV/Navision Classic Client
- 3.6K Navision Attain
- 2.4K Navision Financials
- 115 Navision DOS
- 854 Navision e-Commerce
- 1K NAV Tips & Tricks
- 772 NAV Dutch speaking only
- 615 NAV Courses, Exams & Certification
- 2K Microsoft Dynamics-Other
- 1.5K Dynamics AX
- 304 Dynamics CRM
- 109 Dynamics GP
- 10 Dynamics SL
- 1.5K Other
- 993 SQL General
- 384 SQL Performance
- 34 SQL Tips & Tricks
- 34 Design Patterns (General & Best Practices)
- Architectural Patterns
- 10 Design Patterns
- 5 Implementation Patterns
- 53 3rd Party Products, Services & Events
- 1.7K General
- 1.1K General Chat
- 1.6K Website
- 79 Testing
- 1.2K Download section
- 23 How Tos section
- 260 Feedback
- 12 NAV TechDays 2013 Sessions
- 13 NAV TechDays 2012 Sessions
Microsoft has gone barking mad...
Poltergeist
Member Posts: 200
Is Microsoft barking mad? Have they lost any connection with reality? I just installed NAV2013 R2 on a three tier environment, just to find out that it's now impossible to alter tabledefinitions. That might be an error, you think, but no, it's by design...
We often develop at the clients' site. We simply take our notebooks, change the usercredentialstype to UserName, and are able to connect fine with both the database on SQL and the middletier. At our office, we have a lot of databases on the SQL Server, which have one (or sometimes two) middletiers. Our developers use these middletiers to develop. This is working great, doesn't have a lot problems, and is easy to administer. However, Microsoft has decided that this is not a good way to work, apparently.
In NAV 2013R2, they decided that it's necessary to validate the metadata when changing tables. I don't know why, but they might be right. However, to do so, the managementservice of the middletier is used. Great. I have a middletier, the managementservice is running, port 7045 is open, so no problem, right?
Wrong.
Apparently, the development environment does not have sufficient privileges the connect to the Microsoft Dynamics NAV Server and execute the validation.
Say what?
The development.... Well, you get the drift.
The development environment and the middletier now need to be on the same computer. And that's not all: The developmentclient needs to be started elevated. then, and only then it's possible to change tables.
And true, it's all mentioned in the releasenotes (https://mbs.microsoft.com/downloads/cus ... lingTables), and you might think this will be solved in the future. Well, think again. According to Microsoft, this is per design, and cannot be changed.
Are we the only one facing this problem, or are there more?
We often develop at the clients' site. We simply take our notebooks, change the usercredentialstype to UserName, and are able to connect fine with both the database on SQL and the middletier. At our office, we have a lot of databases on the SQL Server, which have one (or sometimes two) middletiers. Our developers use these middletiers to develop. This is working great, doesn't have a lot problems, and is easy to administer. However, Microsoft has decided that this is not a good way to work, apparently.
In NAV 2013R2, they decided that it's necessary to validate the metadata when changing tables. I don't know why, but they might be right. However, to do so, the managementservice of the middletier is used. Great. I have a middletier, the managementservice is running, port 7045 is open, so no problem, right?
Wrong.
Apparently, the development environment does not have sufficient privileges the connect to the Microsoft Dynamics NAV Server and execute the validation.
Say what?
The development.... Well, you get the drift.
The development environment and the middletier now need to be on the same computer. And that's not all: The developmentclient needs to be started elevated. then, and only then it's possible to change tables.
And true, it's all mentioned in the releasenotes (https://mbs.microsoft.com/downloads/cus ... lingTables), and you might think this will be solved in the future. Well, think again. According to Microsoft, this is per design, and cannot be changed.
Are we the only one facing this problem, or are there more?
0
Comments
What you are describing is a "known issue" and you mention the workaround. That means there will be a fix for it.
About doing changes at customer sites in production I don't think we disagree that this is not best practice.
With 2013 R2 Multi tenacy is introduced to give all partners new business opportunities with the intention of not breaking the old experience. Oops, they made a small mistake that should be fixed.
If you were a true entrepeneur you would see that there are new business opportunities with this release, investigate it and start making money with it and make happy new customers.
Ah well. I feel for them. But who is feeling for us who have to use this crap in the field, let alone sell it? As you can currently read in the forum, this is not the only issue. So maybe, just maybe, the title is nearer on the reality than anything else. There appears to be a BIG leadership problem at Microsoft. Somebody has got to say it first. Doesn't appear to be a) not intended and b) a small mistake. Have a look at the botched-up backup functionality, this definitely breaks the old experience AND best practice for quite a few REAL, EXISTING customers (forgive the loud caps). The privileges thing is just on top and within the same pattern. Somebody seems to forget about the existing customers big time. And no, I don't see the new business opportunities. What I see is a botched-up mess with a lot of good intentions, but probably not fit for business in the real world.
with best regards
Jens
This is a new technology based on a new customer model giving us new business opportunities.
This is NOT intended for the existing model.
It was not meant to break our experience, if it did it needs to be fixed.
Please, please watch you words. We are civilised grownup people here. It brings you nowhere to shout and be ugly to people.
And ofcourse I don't mean to namecall or offend indivuals at Microsoft. I know they work hard, and try the best they can.
On the other hand: they apparently really don't know their own product: It's not necessary to run the development client with elevation. Without works just as "well"
you're right. However, to me it seems that we have been too polite and "civilized" in our opinions for too long. Maybe there is no way to give reasonable feedback to Microsoft, because they don't listen... not just not listening, but singing loud with the fingers in their ears and eyes closed. The only other way is money - no new sales. And I can tell you, this WILL happen, but it means that most of us will change product / line of business / job to have a living afterwards. That people get a little worked up on the fact is all too understandable, IMO.
with best regards
Jens
Time will tell if Multi tenacy is a good investment and which partners will invest in it and which partners decide this is thing that makes them leave the channel.
Money talks. If everyone moves away from NAV someone was wrong. If in two years from now some partners are successful with Multi Tenacy and they add thousands of new customers you are wrong.
There are other reasons to upgrade to NAV 2013R2: the webclient is a lot better, support from Microsoft will run longer, it has more functionality. And some customers just want to run the latest version of NAV...
However, Microsoft Support has ensured me that they will have the matter investigated further, and I certainly hope that a solution will be presented soon. Untill then, we will use a local middletier, or just disable the option "Prevent data loss from table changes" (which is very dangerous, but is defaulting to yes)
When you install it on an existing server, the installation program thinks it's cool to restart your server without promting to ask if you think that is a good idea.
And now back on topic :
say you install and deploy too azure, you need to rdp into the azure machine to do some development. sounds like an issue to me. But then again, it's labeled as a known issue, issue being the important word. So if it get's fixed with some priority i'm cool 8) .
** SI ** Bert Van Gestel **
**********************
My cautious conclusion is it's best to always create a multi-tenant enviroment. Even if you don't actually need it.
I'm not sure if that's right. :-k
I see great possibilities for multi-tenancy. Seems like a good step.
Tino Ruijs
Microsoft Dynamics NAV specialist
Supporting a SAAS based business model
Posibility; Multiple customers on 1 codebase.
Tino Ruijs
Microsoft Dynamics NAV specialist
In Europe, with the NSA/GCHQ/whoever listening to everything and telling your competition. Riiight. This model was dead 20 years ago and it will be in short time, except we have a game changer like unbreakable encryption happening to us. It is no way for a sustaining business to do this.
with best regards
Jens
with best regards
Jens
This is what Microsoft uses as replacement for C5.
In Denmark there are already partners setting this up in Multi Tenant mode.
Yes, you can customise it further but then the mods count for all customers.
This works, it's proven. Exact Online is extremely successful in The Netherlands and I want NAV to do that better.
There is a market for this and I am happy that Microsoft decided to make NAV Multi Tenant rather than AX or GP.
They obviously do not want have many Solution Centers and this is HUGE mistake. Most of NAV customers are small companies with unique requirements. For some reason Microsoft decided that we have to write one BIG system and put them into multitenant environment. To write BIG system you need BIG solution center – and as result they aligned there pricing policy and partner policy to make us BIG.
The result: 2013 is incredibly BAD year for dynamics NAV. Nobody wants to say this but everything pointing out those NAV sales dropped and most likely will be going down even more.
Let see why:
1. No new people joining NAV Cannel. We all here for 10+ years and NAV limited by our ability to sell and implement.
2. Microsoft completely stops supporting Sales for NAV. All resources moved to AX and CRM.
3. Small NSC cannot compete with bigger ones because of margins. Bigger ones do not have resources – because most of good people do freelancing and have small companies.
4. Microsoft completely killed Add-on program. I would estimate that over 90% of IP that have been developed will never be moved to 2013. Before we could pack our IP in add-on and compete with other systems – now we have to sell it based on Object Price or Certify. This is completely unexplainable for me – NO OTHER SYSTEM has this rule. AX, GP, SL - all do not have object price and there development environment 2-3 times cheaper than NAV. Why NAV clients have to pay per OBJECT? In last 15 years we developed thousands of objects. We have demo systems tailored for specific verticals – this was helping us sell NAV. Now we have to throw it out or spend time and effort and certify it. WHY???
5. Did Microsoft look what happening to smaller NSC’s? Are they working with master VAR’s? I think most of them will switch system and in some cases it will not be Microsoft. So – sales will go even more down.
I think NAV will be discontinued in next 3-5 years. Will be good if they spin it off and sell – but most likely they will just shut it down. Market needs system for small companies with unique requirements. Microsoft does not want play on this market – some other company will want.
Adaptive Business Solutions
http://justjewelrysoftware.com
Do you keep all your money under your mattress, or is in the bank which you conveniently access online? What difference is there between that, and logging into your ERP online, whether it be private or public cloud or AZURE?
What difference is someone hacking your ERP online, or on prem, or even a disgruntled employee doing it.
We're 100% cloud and use a data center that rivals Ft. Knox, and our customers aren't stupid and naive.
I had one occasion where the head of accounting asked the head of a consulting company who just had proposed to outsource the processing of the companies legal consolidation figures into the cloud "Are you mad? Do you think we're idiots?". So, there you go.
with best regards
Jens
While Cloud based services may not be the solution for everyone, it is a very real part of this market.
You "story" above seems to be more about paranoia
And you base all that on what? A little symbol next to my logon info? I've been in this business since 1985 and am far from "happily naive".
My DSL serves me just fine.
BTW - availability and quality of internet services can vary quite drastically across the US also. Even town to town in the same area. For example, where I live you can't get one companies fiber based service. But move the next town over, and you can.
The business data of a certain company is a complete different thing. There are lots of "possibilities" to misuse the data and make profit out of it. Even a simple list of customers and their addresses could be sold. I think that's why it will be always hard to sell cloud solutions in Europe. But that surely also depends on the price...
Separately - I'd like to make two points.
1. Over the last several releases the NAV product has been transformed - from two tier to three - from thick client to web client - from on premise to cloud capable. In doing so we have worked hard to protect the skills, experience, domain expertise and intellectual property in the NAV Partner Community. We recognise the investments you have made in our product. By effecting the technology shift (from NAV 5 through to 2013 R2) we believe we have significantly extended the period over which you can get value from them.
2. Multi Tenancy is not compulsory. It is however an essential ingredient for some part of our future success. Some existing Partners want to evolve their "traditional" NAV business model towards a more repeatable approach. Cooper Parry (key the Directions Keynote Video) are one example. We're talking to a number of new Partners who want to build net new NAV practices focussed exclusively on the repeatable model. Meantime we continue to support the client specific approach.
I am really sorry but this is not true. If you want a standard NAV functionality to copy a company from one database to another you can only do this in a Multi tenancy environment in NAV 2013R2.
NAV customers do this on everyday basis, they copy, delete rename companies, constantly.
Now they cannot do this any more, only via Powershell.
How many people, with no technical background, know how to use powershell?
How is an e.g. accountant with basic IT skills supposed to create or copy a company ?
Why removing particular functionality, without having a better replacement?
I know that Microsoft is only looking at Cloud solution and this is fine and in a way I support this, but this is no excuse, to destroy existing powerful functionality.
Multi tenancy and Company functionality can and must coexist.
Anyway, if it could be done via powershell, why can't you create a little powershell script that could be executed by your non IT guys?
Sorry, but I have to disagree with this. From my experience, the bulk of NAV (in fact the bulk of mid-range accounting systems) are sold in to companies with often no formal IT departments. While I would aggre people should be trained, I would not agree they should need to learm some cryptic command-line process to accomplish something that has been doable via user-friendly menus for sevaral version. Does seem like a step backwards to me.
This is a rough script to Copy company in NAV 2013 R2.
I think It will take me a few days to create a nice GUI for none technical people to understand how to use it.
In NAV 2013 the process was export company as FBK, import Company, no technical skills needed to do it.
2. Conversion of standard unmodified Cronus 2013 to 2013 R2 makes something wrong with Indexes on SQL. Having troubles with it when trying to open the database by RTC:
Cannot drop the index 'dbo.#############', because it does not exist or you do not have permission.
3. What for to delete/create Companies from Console? Why can not it be done through the RTC?
4. Inventory Valuation, as many other reports do work neither in 2013 nor in 2013 R2. Generating of reports by huge sets of data makes reports fall down with Out of Memory Exception. Hotfix MS released for 2013 earlier does not work. However, which is more important, reports do not work in 2013 R2. Agree that the problem most likely is not about NAV, but supplementary software (SSRS,.NET etc....).
Sure. Who would doubt... :whistle: