NAV 2013 - An Open Letter to the NAV Dev. Team

einsTeIn.NET · 2013-08-21

Open source in ERP doesn't make sense. You need someone who supports you in case of issues. And that's not someone who's able to read the code but someone who knows the details of the business logic. You don't pay that much for an ERP system because reading the code is very complex, you pay that much because you need someone with background knowhow.

jglathe · 2013-08-22

Hi,

Miklos Hollender wrote:

Please understand just one thing only. "Reporting" does not matter much, but documents are an incredibly sensitive thing!

I second that. Major pain.

with best regards

Jens

kriki · 2013-08-22

Miklos Hollender wrote:

IT especially ERP is still in the "Wild West" stage when you cannot sue a supplier for having too many bugs. (I think this has to change somehow in the coming decades, there have to be professional standards set like in every other industry for buildings to cars.)

You mean we can (or will be able to) sue Microsoft for having too many bugs in Windows?

:shock: :?

Miklos_Hollender · 2013-08-22

einsTeIn.NET wrote:

Open source in ERP doesn't make sense. You need someone who supports you in case of issues. And that's not someone who's able to read the code but someone who knows the details of the business logic. You don't pay that much for an ERP system because reading the code is very complex, you pay that much because you need someone with background knowhow.

Please don't mistify the "background knowhow" and "details of business logic" stuff. This is actually one thing this industry is not really honest about. We often pretend it's rocket science and takes some kind of a special knowledge. It's not. Most of ERP is just summing up values per this or that. It disturbs me it that we generate this mythology that it is somehow difficult or a deep knowledge like science. It's not, mostly just relational sums. It's not like being a doctor or something. Yes, there are a thousand little tricks of course, a million customs slowly learned like this industry like that stuff this way or that way, but that kind of knowledge is not properly organized, written down, catalogized anyway... I mean, what I am saying, you can be a construction company and you can get in contact with a nice famous established consulting company, and they can send you a consultant who spent 10 years on the normal kinds of sales-order-purchase-order companies, and that person will be just as clueless about your construction kinds of quoting, invoicing, project accounting etc. needs as any random person who has a business administration degree and can read code. I know because I was in that position.

So let's not mistify all this background knowledge, OK? The only consultants I know who have can really boast of something seriously like this are those who spent a lot of time being specialized on one industry, like the Incadea guys on selling cars. Or the Megabau guys on construction. I know some of them, and they could really become a mid-manager at a client company any day. They have impressive domain knowledge. But in most cased, without industry specialization, generalist consultants just bring product knowledge to the table. Which is perfectly fine but let's not mistify it.

I have seen it multiple times that generalist programmers became productive in supporting NAV in weeks. There was an error message, they read the debugger, translated that to human language, a nontechie consultant or a power user realized it kind of makes sense. They did tasks like "see that field there? When that number is 0 don't let me press this button, give an error message" and this is basically 70% of support anyway...

When I was a very beginner I believed all the mistification about very deep know-hows and process knowledges and whatnot that many consulting companies boasted. I gradually became cynical about it. They don't have it because it is not needed - because most support and customization is trivial in every sense except the technical - because what most users do IS trivial in the business process sense - they just want an invoice to look good, a report sum to match up with another report sum, and stupid stuff not allowed - only the technical part is hard...

Miklos_Hollender · 2013-08-22

kriki wrote:

Miklos Hollender wrote:

IT especially ERP is still in the "Wild West" stage when you cannot sue a supplier for having too many bugs. (I think this has to change somehow in the coming decades, there have to be professional standards set like in every other industry for buildings to cars.)

You mean we can (or will be able to) sue Microsoft for having too many bugs in Windows? :shock: :?

I know it sounds crazy today and I am not talking about something that happens tomorrow. But look at how construction works, or how cars are recalled etc. I think sooner or later the software industry will have to "grow up" the same way and really sell products with a warranty. This will happen but we may be 85 years old and senile by the time it happens, but a big industry can't always stay "wild west", where anything goes without legal responsibility for dysfunctionality, can it?

Alex_Chow · 2013-08-22

NAV report is utter crap. Doesn't matter how you spin it. Crap is still crap.

clausl · 2013-08-22

Join my sessions at Directions EMEA or Directions USA or NAV Tech Days and probably also NAVUG and Convergence EMEA.

Here I will focus on all the things not working and the many pitfalls in the Visual Studio designer, but also focus on how you can be more effective when you are designing RDLC reports.

/Claus Lundstrøm

einsTeIn.NET · 2013-08-23

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say the business knowhow is far too much complex. I just said you need someone who understands you. It's exactly what you say here

Miklos Hollender wrote:

I mean, what I am saying, you can be a construction company and you can get in contact with a nice famous established consulting company, and they can send you a consultant who spent 10 years on the normal kinds of sales-order-purchase-order companies, and that person will be just as clueless about your construction kinds of quoting, invoicing, project accounting etc. needs...

I think there is no mystery at all in any business, but there is some special knowledge in every business. You just need someone who knows about these things to support you in the best possible way. (Or someone who's able to learn the ropes very fast, but those guys are very rare.)

Miklos Hollender wrote:

They did tasks like "see that field there? When that number is 0 don't let me press this button, give an error message" and this is basically 70% of support anyway...

Those tasks are not the ones I'm talking about. If you get such easy requests you should think that the users did think about the business case beforehand. But most of the time that's not the case. They just "translate" their problem into an easy task. Sometimes that's ok and it fits to their business standards or at least doesn't conflict with the business standards. But sometimes it's rubbish and a fully fledged consultant/programmer would notice that and try to show you another way.

Miklos Hollender wrote:

Yes, there are a thousand little tricks of course, a million customs slowly learned like this industry like that stuff this way or that way, but that kind of knowledge is not properly organized, written down, catalogized anyway...

These are the things I would expect to get from an experienced consultant in my business. Just simple coding stuff, that could be done by monkeys if the specification is fine, doesn't belong to business logic.

Miklos_Hollender · 2013-08-23

clausl wrote:

Join my sessions at Directions EMEA or Directions USA or NAV Tech Days and probably also NAVUG and Convergence EMEA.

Here I will focus on all the things not working and the many pitfalls in the Visual Studio designer, but also focus on how you can be more effective when you are designing RDLC reports.

/Claus Lundstrøm

Thanks Claus. Are these viewable or downloadable online? Because I won't be there in person. BTW - shouldn't pitfalls and so on actually be written down, you know, like a real documentation? Or should we start taking videos and suchlike, so not written stuff, seriously as documentation material? So far I didn't, I considered them a form of advertisement.

OldNavDog · 2013-09-11

clausl wrote:

the way the Actions are now done in Configuration in NAV 2013 and not controlled 100% from Page Designer, is a clear signal that somebody in the NAV team have no clue on how much extra work that gives us Partners, when we cannot control this in Page Designer for our Add-on solutions.

/Claus Lundstrøm

You have NO idea how much time and effort I have put into trying to work around this "Feature" for OUR Add-On Products!!!

It's even worse than I thought: Not only are these "Undocumented", "Undiscoverable" "Customizations" Tied to a "Profile", they are ACTUALLY tied to a COMBINATION of "Profile" -> "Role Center" and "whatever-those-left-side-navigation-buttons-are-called-today".

No fooling! If you have, say, the "Item List" page (which is HEAVILY Customized!) appearing IN THE SAME PROFILE, SAME ROLE CENTER, but appearing "under a Different "Group"" in the Role Center, THE CUSTOMIZATIONS WILL NOT BE THE SAME!!!

However, Microsoft (obviously!) has some sort of "tool" that allows them to MERGE these changes ACROSS whatever "Profile/Role Center/Navigation-Button" combinations they want to.

And with something like 384 (!!!!) Pages in "Base" NAV sporting SOME sort of (WHO KNOWS? COMPLETELY OPAQUE TO THE DEVELOPER!!!!) "CUSTOMIZATION"...

Wow.

Just. Wow.

clausl · 2013-09-11

Miklos Hollender wrote:

Thanks Claus. Are these viewable or downloadable online? Because I won't be there in person. BTW - shouldn't pitfalls and so on actually be written down, you know, like a real documentation? Or should we start taking videos and suchlike, so not written stuff, seriously as documentation material? So far I didn't, I considered them a form of advertisement.

I'm trying to blog about all the things not working, in Visual Studio here: http://www.mibuso.com/blogs/clausl but if you want them all you need to attend one of my report training classes.
Would be great with real documentation though, but currently not something I have time to do, but Microsoft is of course always welcome to document all the things not working in Visual Studio.
New on the list is Expression editor in Visual Studio 2012, which we can now use in NAV 2013 R2. Try to hit the LEFTARROW key in the Expression editor. Result: Your cursor disappear from the editor!!! How something that simple is not working in Visual Studio 2012 is a puzzle to me... It worked fine in VS 2008 and VS 2010, so why brake this in VS 2012???

/Claus Lundstrøm

davmac1 · 2013-09-12

Hi Claus,
The answer is simple - like we discussed in your Atlanta class. Send the Visual Studio developers into the field to work with the partners who use the product, and do this on a regular basis. Then they will learn how their products get used in real life, and go back smarter and wiser.

OldNavDog · 2013-09-12

davmac1 wrote:

Hi Claus,
The answer is simple - like we discussed in your Atlanta class. Send the Visual Studio developers into the field to work with the partners who use the product, and do this on a regular basis. Then they will learn how their products get used in real life, and go back smarter and wiser.

...or have them just buy a copy of FileMaker Pro. You can say what you will about its database capabilities; but I'm here to tell you: THAT's how you make a Report Designer!

...And With 2013 R2 further taking a BIG step in separating the database from the Presentation Layer (in fact, the only real new "features" are in furtherance of that paradigm), my prediction is that we're only about one more Revision from essentially LOSING a large portion of the Developer's ability to modify Pages to any real extent.

All we can hope is that their decision to take the Report Designer "internal" will mean that the abomination that is the current state of affairs in the Reporting world with NAV will get better, as the Visual Studio devs. Won't be calling the shots anymore...

deV.ch · 2013-09-12

So you say VS2012 is even worse then VS2010 in case of reporting? How is that even possible? Every single change from 2008 to 2010 in reporting is a complete BS, the only thing that that was a real improvement was the ability to use dataset fields in the header and footer, every other change to the UX is either completely idiotic and breaks the whole "workflow", I mean simple UX patterns we learned in WYSIWYG designing over the past decades are changed for no real benefit, for example why the hell should i end up in editing mode when i click a cell or textbox? That doesn't make sense in any way, if i click an object first mode should always be to "move" the object!

Then to make the most simple layouting like printing table headers on all pages, i need to enable e "secret" mode (Extended) to see all groups in the group designer, and change a property there, while there is a property with the same reading on the (unusable) wizard for the table. In Fact there are three places that are named something about repeating.

AND removing the Value from the property grid is just insane, needing to click 2 or three times and open sub dialogs just to see the expression of a cell / textbox is...
I don't have words for such an idiotic idea. This is ridiculous...

Reporting in VS2008 was ok, it was not the best but it was doable, had a UX that was acceptable and the workflow could be adopted in some time. But working with VS2010 is just a PITA.

jglathe · 2013-09-12

OldNavDog wrote:

...And With 2013 R2 further taking a BIG step in separating the database from the Presentation Layer (in fact, the only real new "features" are in furtherance of that paradigm), my prediction is that we're only about one more Revision from essentially LOSING a large portion of the Developer's ability to modify Pages to any real extent.

This. A very dangerous development, IMO. It will outright kill the product. And all for the sake of "device independence"... where we have soooo many different devices with a native RTC. And UX - one of my hate buzzwords of late. The UX IS TERRIBLE! For the developer (not a real concern, only frustrating talented people), and for the user. Sad times.

with best regards

Jens

OldNavDog · 2013-09-12

jglathe wrote:

This. A very dangerous development, IMO. It will outright kill the product.

Unfortunately, there are many higher-ups at MS that would actually enjoy exactly that, so that Great Plains (errr, MS Dynamics GP) would have no competition in that space.

The ONLY reason that NAV is still around is that it sells so well in Europe (and I think it doesn't do so badly in the US, either).

But as far as us NAV Application devs, MS couldn't care less, that much is crystal-clear!

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-12

clausl wrote:

Miklos Hollender wrote:

Thanks Claus. Are these viewable or downloadable online? Because I won't be there in person. BTW - shouldn't pitfalls and so on actually be written down, you know, like a real documentation? Or should we start taking videos and suchlike, so not written stuff, seriously as documentation material? So far I didn't, I considered them a form of advertisement.

I'm trying to blog about all the things not working, in Visual Studio here: http://www.mibuso.com/blogs/clausl but if you want them all you need to attend one of my report training classes.
Would be great with real documentation though, but currently not something I have time to do, but Microsoft is of course always welcome to document all the things not working in Visual Studio.
New on the list is Expression editor in Visual Studio 2012, which we can now use in NAV 2013 R2. Try to hit the LEFTARROW key in the Expression editor. Result: Your cursor disappear from the editor!!! How something that simple is not working in Visual Studio 2012 is a puzzle to me... It worked fine in VS 2008 and VS 2010, so why brake this in VS 2012???

/Claus Lundstrøm

So now we're left with blogs to learn how to properly do report development. This is just peachy...

You left Microsoft at the right time Claus. I know much of this is not your fault and I appreciate you championing the reporting aspect of product. Putting perfume on shit is still shit. Let's all move on from this.

So let's talk alternatives on custom reports. What are some alternatives that you find work and do not work?

Jet Reports - It's okay but resource intensive. And it's quite slow and a resource hog. For everyday processing, this is not a good solution.

Pivotier - bought by Jet Reports. I'm not familiar with how this works with NAV2013, anyone care of comment?

SSRS - This has been, by far, the most acceptable solution on report creation. It's ugly as hell, but the users gets what they want and the feedback has generally been positive.

Smart Query - Found this product and looks promising. Anyone worked with this before?

jglathe · 2013-09-12

Alex Chow wrote:

So let's talk alternatives on custom reports. What are some alternatives that you find work and do not work?

Jet Reports - It's okay but resource intensive. And it's quite slow and a resource hog. For everyday processing, this is not a good solution.

Pivotier - bought by Jet Reports. I'm not familiar with how this works with NAV2013, anyone care of comment?

SSRS - This has been, by far, the most acceptable solution on report creation. It's ugly as hell, but the users gets what they want and the feedback has generally been positive.

Smart Query - Found this product and looks promising. Anyone worked with this before?

Well. We tried to get information from Jet regarding Pivotier, turned up nothing. We got to see a BI tool and a lightweight, excel-based reporting tool. So my guess is that Pivotier got bought to take out serious competition.

I'll say SSRS is the only halfway viable option you have for reports. But in the end, this leaves us with a seriously crippled product. The core is intact (or so), but all human interfaces are shredded.

The other day I had to do some logic and layout changes on reports on a NAVISION 3.56A/EUR system. At the company I first got in contact with NAV. The owner had changed and wanted some reports differently. They are still using it, and it's working. Nearly the same workflows since 1994. One was a new report from scratch. It took me about two hours including test and roll-out to make the changes, about as long as we were discussing them beforehand. Impossible with the current version... Something has gone seriously wrong in the last years.

with best regards

Jens

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-12

OldNavDog wrote:

Unfortunately, there are many higher-ups at MS that would actually enjoy exactly that, so that Great Plains (errr, MS Dynamics GP) would have no competition in that space.

The ONLY reason that NAV is still around is that it sells so well in Europe (and I think it doesn't do so badly in the US, either).

But as far as us NAV Application devs, MS couldn't care less, that much is crystal-clear!

This whole statement is so wrong that I don't even know where to begin. I think you're mindset is still stuck in 2002 when it was bought by Microsoft.

It's crystal clear now that MS is focusing their attention to NAV in the small to middle tier, and AX in the middle-upper tier WORLDWIDE (including US). In fact, they're focusing sole on pushing AX now. If you don't believe me, just call your local Microsoft office and ask them what products you should buy.

MS cares very much about the NAV space and wants the partners to do well. I think the disagreement is about how to go about doing that.

If I was a GP or SL partner, I'd be very worried.

jglathe · 2013-09-12

Hi Alex,

Alex Chow wrote:

This whole statement is so wrong that I don't even know where to begin.

Sorry, but regarding this topic I'm afraid you're too close to Microsoft. You're an MVP with other contacts to Microsoft than we have. From the outside it just looks like OldNAVDog says, except maybe for the GP bit (but I'm in Europe, so there might be local differences). For Europe the picture is a little different - the Cloud is DEAD MEAT here, for well-known reasons. Nobody in their right mind would trust business critical and secret data to the cloud. Pushing a Cloud-based NAV is pointless except for the gullible. But that's small fry, you can't live from it. And for the existing customer base you have no viable upgrade path - RTC is rejected by most existing customers (I understand them), reporting is shot, and everything connecting to other business critical (but public, like web shops) systems is nearly bespoke... mostly nothing off-the-shelf. The rollup fixes should be an improvement, except that they put an additional strain on partners (also because of bugs in them).
And BTW: Try talking to Microsoft if you're not an MVP or selling seven digits of their licenses. If I were a NAV partner (I'm associated to one), I'd be looking for alternatives.

with best regards

Jens

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-12

Yes, this is why I say:

MS cares very much about the NAV space and wants the partners to do well. I think the disagreement is about how to go about doing that.

They care, but they don't know what to do. In the US, we would say that they're "out of touch".

They're investing more in AX and NAV than GP and SL, I can guarantee you that.

I know the results of the investment is not what you guys are expecting, but man... we had some GREAT parties.

On a serious note, they sincerely believed RDLC is good and provides for better integration of Microsoft products. And this decision was made by an executive higher up that probably has since been replaced several times.

Again, the intention is there, but the execution is not.

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-12

Also, regarding the implementation of RTC, drink the Kool-aide. You'll find that if you do, it's actually pretty damn good. I sincerely believe that I can make better business decisions using RTC than classic client.

The last part of the NAV windows client kool-aide that I can't really swallow is the reporting. It taste like shit.

OldNavDog · 2013-09-13

I know the results of the investment is not what you guys are expecting, but man... we had some GREAT parties.

On a serious note, they sincerely believed RDLC is good and provides for better integration of Microsoft products. And this decision was made by an executive higher up that probably has since been replaced several times.

Again, the intention is there, but the execution is not.

I'm sorry, Alex, but all that is cold comfort to those of us who are stuck trying to actually work with this (ever changing!!!) PIG, but, UNLIKE YOU, don't have The King's Ear!

"...Had some GREAT PARTIES", INDEED!!!

Now, how about we have some Great PRODUCT?!?

Howabout you USE that MVP-access to effect some CHANGE? The six degrees of separation theory has been proven time and again. In other words, you are probably only one or two "handshakes" from bringing these (all-too-legitimate) grievances to the "ear" of someone who COULD actually DO something about it!

What are you waiting for? Make the NEXT Party something other than a BeerFest!

OldNavDog · 2013-09-13

Alex Chow wrote:

Also, regarding the implementation of RTC, drink the Kool-aide. You'll find that if you do, it's actually pretty damn good.

Yeah, it's SO darn good that Microsoft even has to use secret Configuration Tools to Define Custom TABS on Pages that work on more than one Profile/Role-Center/Action-Group combination.

So good that we can't even control whether certain Actions even Appear on Pages, let ALONE control their BEHAVIOR.

So good we can't even place a "Menu Button" on the Home Ribbon through "Promotion".

So good that we have markedly LESS formatting control than even a simple HTML WEBPAGE. Frickin' BROWSERS support CSS, why can't the Windows Client? At least then we could have a LITTLE control over things like Font, Style, Field Placement, etc. For Goddesses' Sake, my KINGDOM for even the formatting possible with a simple HTML "TABLE"!!

So good we have to resort to .NET to change the background color of a field.

So good we have to resort to that bug-ridden abomination "Fixed Layout" stuff to deign to have more than 2 columns.

So good we can't even have TOOLTIPS(!!!)

So good we have lost some VERY useful Page Event Triggers.

So good that we can't even have CODE on Role Centers.

So good we can't even create a simple INPUT Dialog without wasting a Page.

Shall I continue...?

Sorry, this Kool-Aide tastes funny, too!

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-13

OldNavDog wrote:

I'm sorry, Alex, but all that is cold comfort to those of us who are stuck trying to actually work with this (ever changing!!!) PIG, but, UNLIKE YOU, don't have The King's Ear!

"...Had some GREAT PARTIES", INDEED!!!

Now, how about we have some Great PRODUCT?!?

Howabout you USE that MVP-access to effect some CHANGE? The six degrees of separation theory has been proven time and again. In other words, you are probably only one or two "handshakes" from bringing these (all-too-legitimate) grievances to the "ear" of someone who COULD actually DO something about it!

What are you waiting for? Make the NEXT Party something other than a BeerFest!

Geez... I guess humor doesn't carry too well over the internet forums. I hope you don't go about gossiping about how great Microsoft parties are because what I said is a joke.

Also, you guys take this MVP status with too much weight. I don't have the "king's ears". They listen to you guys as much as they listen to me or any other MVPs. In another words, not too much. They only listen to partners that sells, even then to a limited degree. So if you work for a large solution center, have your CEO complain to Microsoft. That will carry a lot more weight than some dumb MVP.

I bitch and moan and I use profanity all in the interest of promoting NAV. Instead of complaining, offer some real alternatives and try to understand where they're coming from.

Alex_Chow · 2013-09-13

OldNavDog wrote:

Yeah, it's SO darn good that Microsoft even has to use secret Configuration Tools to Define Custom TABS on Pages that work on more than one Profile/Role-Center/Action-Group combination.

So good that we can't even control whether certain Actions even Appear on Pages, let ALONE control their BEHAVIOR.

So good we can't even place a "Menu Button" on the Home Ribbon through "Promotion".

So good that we have markedly LESS formatting control than even a simple HTML WEBPAGE. Frickin' BROWSERS support CSS, why can't the Windows Client? At least then we could have a LITTLE control over things like Font, Style, Field Placement, etc. For Goddesses' Sake, my KINGDOM for even the formatting possible with a simple HTML "TABLE"!!

So good we have to resort to .NET to change the background color of a field.

So good we have to resort to that bug-ridden abomination "Fixed Layout" stuff to deign to have more than 2 columns.

So good we can't even have TOOLTIPS(!!!)

So good we have lost some VERY useful Page Event Triggers.

So good that we can't even have CODE on Role Centers.

So good we can't even create a simple INPUT Dialog without wasting a Page.

Shall I continue...?

Sorry, this Kool-Aide tastes funny, too!

It's good because it forces us to re-evaluate what's really important from the User's perspective. Try training a new user using the classic client and try training a new user using windows client and see which one they prefer.

The classic client is gone. It's not coming back. Deal with it. If you don't like it, suggest some good alternatives that's workable. I.e. NAV RDLC sucks, use SSRS instead.

If you don't like the kool-aide, then stop using NAV. It's really that simple. If you can't leave because you have mortgage or children to support then help make the product better instead of just bad mouthing it with nothing to contribute. Start a blog and actually share your "OldNAVDog" experience.

I'm positive that somewhere, new young hotshot developer that will make the NAV world a better place is just waiting for your guidance.

jglathe · 2013-09-13

Hi Alex,

sorry, can't resist...

Alex Chow wrote:

It's good because it forces us to re-evaluate what's really important from the User's perspective. Try training a new user using the classic client and try training a new user using windows client and see which one they prefer.

At least the users I know, they want to get their work done. Funny thing, that. It's a little like switching from Office2003 to something with a higher version number. It might look nicer, but you're slower (and yes, you stay slower than before) because your menus and old hotkeys are gone, instead you have the ribbon, and you have to do the icon-hunting thing ALL THE TIME. The new users seem to get along easier with the new interface, but you can use a mouse only so fast. They won't get up to the CC speeds no matter what. What they have to do is no simple task, not only mass data entry, they need to make decisions, and they have to do it in a reasonable amount of time. What they never do is looking at some type of diagram, you know pie chart, bar chart or suchlike. They know their numbers.
OldNAVDog only says that you can't even properly code for the RTC to properly use the new interface, and he is right about it.

Alex Chow wrote:

The classic client is gone. It's not coming back. Deal with it. If you don't like it, suggest some good alternatives that's workable. I.e. NAV RDLC sucks, use SSRS instead.

Sorry, can't laugh about this one anymore. Done the suggesting thing since 2008, been at Microsoft Germany HQ at one occasion, they don't even pretend to listen. But most of the (higher-up) people responsible for NAV have been replaced several times since then. Not a good sign.

Alex Chow wrote:

If you don't like the kool-aide, then stop using NAV. It's really that simple. If you can't leave because you have mortgage or children to support then help make the product better instead of just bad mouthing it with nothing to contribute. Start a blog and actually share your "OldNAVDog" experience.

Be careful what you wish for.

Alex Chow wrote:

I'm positive that somewhere, new young hotshot developer that will make the NAV world a better place is just waiting for your guidance.

I'm not. The education chain is broken on this one, I'm afraid.

with best regards

Jens

davmac1 · 2013-09-13

I am happy MS finally changed the reporting. Unfortunately Microsoft's product updates have not retained backward compatibility, and they have not handled all the real world requirements app developers need.
Recommend you all go to Claus's blog http://mibuso.com/blogs/clausl/ and vote on his request on fixing headers in RDLC https://connect.microsoft.com/dynamicssuggestions/feedback/details/723730

It would also be nice if Microsoft wen back through the standard reports and changed them to follow their own recommendations - like limiting the dataset passed to the report engine.

The problem with relying on others for part of the technology, is you have to live with whatever they feel like doing. The advantage is you get to piggyback on to much bigger development budgets.

einsTeIn.NET · 2013-09-16

jglathe wrote:

Nearly the same workflows since 1994.

I know that there are some exceptional cases where this is still possible, but most companies can't base their business on workflows that were introduced in 1994, e.g. just because of legal reasons.

einsTeIn.NET · 2013-09-16

jglathe wrote:

For Europe the picture is a little different - the Cloud is DEAD MEAT here, for well-known reasons. Nobody in their right mind would trust business critical and secret data to the cloud. Pushing a Cloud-based NAV is pointless except for the gullible.

That's absolutly true. There might be an option for MS to push it by self-hosted clouds, but I think even this won't find any acceptance in the market. In that case security is more important than availability.

NAV 2013 - An Open Letter to the NAV Dev. Team

Comments

Categories