Bullseye. The client already experienced a month-end (Mar31) and the VP of Marketting was in a snit as most of her reports could not be completed in Great Plains either directly or with Crystal Reports which everyone believes is a magic pill.
I visit this client once per week and each week since the migration has been uncovering one shortcoming or another of GP. Everything seems to be an add-on. I've added so many features in the 6-1/2 years of my tenure that they think that today's shopping cart systems will do the same. Sales Tax, Customer Lookup, Product Lookup, Invoice Print, Check Print, Order Print, Job Cost and many others are all too generic and need help. The client is too stubborn to revert back to their legacy MV situation. Thus, damn the torpedos and continue hacking at GP to get the job done. Thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Results" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 12:55 PM Subject: Re: Conversions > Mark, > Technically Overview: > Using some sort of a schedule, you identify new and modified data > on the Great Plains system, and move just that data to the MV system, > converting the layout and data. > > That leaves you with the following discreet tasks: > How do you identify new or modified data in Great Plains? > How do you move and transform the data? > How fresh does the data have to be? (i.e. what is the User's > expectation weighted against the network overhead of 'shipping' the data.) > How do you schedule that move and transform? > > Management Overview: > Tax law (in the US, I believe you are in the US) will require > you to keep records going back at least 5 years. Therefore, the old > system needs to be available. Since it will have to be up and intact, > you see a major cost and performance savings in using that already paid > for hardware and already developed software to act as a data warehouse. > If they want to move those reports in the future, they can do it > in a controlled manner, without having a loss of productivity or > information. Not using the older system as a data warehouse will apply > pressure to complete these functions now, adding cost and delaying the > needed flow of information. > -- > > Sincerely, > Charles Barouch > www.KeyAlly.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Mark Johnson wrote: > > >This sounds very tempting, using MV as a data warehouse to a non-MV (or MV) > >primary application. Does anyone else have any insight on how this flies, > >management-wise or technically. > > > >I like it as all of the original reports are already written and tested and > >it keeps the customer a MV customer. > > > >Thanks > >Mark Johnson > > > > > > > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users