Epicor 10 Blank Title 120300

Yahoo Archive
1
thank you
2
Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor 10?

Christopher W. Marsch
IT/Database Administrator
Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
19E British American Blvd.
Latham, NY 12110
(518) 399-3616 x272
Cell: (518) 795-0200



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
3
Premature send - Anyways, obviously Sept-Oct is only speculation and not a hard fast time frame. I would expect that Insights might shed more light on a date for 10 if they are close. Hearing it from Epicor would be far better than third or fourth hand me :)

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Giese <jgiese@...> wrote:
>
> I've been told from an unnamed source they are looking at Sept Oct release
>
>
>
> Joshua Giese
>
> CTO
>
> 920.437.6400 Ext. 337
>
> Site ID: 27450-E905700B2-SQL64
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Chris Marsch" <cmarsch@...>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Vantage Discussion List (VANTAGE@...)" <VANTAGE@...>
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 3:49:33 PM
> Subject: [Vantage] Epicor 10
>
>
>
> Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor 10?
>
> Christopher W. Marsch
> IT/Database Administrator
> Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> 19E British American Blvd.
> Latham, NY 12110
> (518) 399-3616 x272
> Cell: (518) 795-0200
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
4
We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET instead of having the Progress layer in the middle. Would be great for performance and development.

I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Marsch, Chris" <cmarsch@...> wrote:
>
> Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor 10?
>
> Christopher W. Marsch
> IT/Database Administrator
> Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> 19E British American Blvd.
> Latham, NY 12110
> (518) 399-3616 x272
> Cell: (518) 795-0200
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
5
If you have not been with Epicor long enough, just always assume that their next release will have some major bugs....never jump into any new release just because it came out!

This is just my humble opinion....and experience.

Manasa












From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of adamnoffie
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 7:11 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10



We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET instead of having the Progress layer in the middle. Would be great for performance and development.

I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Marsch, Chris" <cmarsch@...<mailto:cmarsch@...>> wrote:
>
> Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor 10?
>
> Christopher W. Marsch
> IT/Database Administrator
> Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> 19E British American Blvd.
> Latham, NY 12110
> (518) 399-3616 x272
> Cell: (518) 795-0200
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
In other words now is the best time to upgrade to 9.05.7-whatever, it
will never be any more stable or bug free (relatively speaking).



Patrick



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Manasa Reddy
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 07:31
To: 'vantage@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10





If you have not been with Epicor long enough, just always assume that
their next release will have some major bugs....never jump into any new
release just because it came out!

This is just my humble opinion....and experience.

Manasa

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of adamnoffie
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 7:11 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10

We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
instead of having the Progress layer in the middle. Would be great for
performance and development.

I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be
riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Marsch, Chris"
<cmarsch@...<mailto:cmarsch@...
<mailto:cmarsch@...%3cmailto:cmarsch@...> >> wrote:
>
> Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor
10?
>
> Christopher W. Marsch
> IT/Database Administrator
> Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> 19E British American Blvd.
> Latham, NY 12110
> (518) 399-3616 x272
> Cell: (518) 795-0200
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
7
Sounds accurate to me! As soon as we work all the bugs out, a new version comes out.

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Winter, Patrick
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 8:49 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10



In other words now is the best time to upgrade to 9.05.7-whatever, it
will never be any more stable or bug free (relatively speaking).

Patrick

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
Of Manasa Reddy
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 07:31
To: 'vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:%26%2339%3Bvantage%40yahoogroups.com>'
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10

If you have not been with Epicor long enough, just always assume that
their next release will have some major bugs....never jump into any new
release just because it came out!

This is just my humble opinion....and experience.

Manasa

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of adamnoffie
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 7:11 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10

We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
instead of having the Progress layer in the middle. Would be great for
performance and development.

I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be
riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Marsch, Chris"
<cmarsch@...<mailto:cmarsch@...
<mailto:cmarsch@...%3cmailto:cmarsch@...<mailto:cmarsch@...%3cmailto:cmarsch@...%0b%3cmailto:cmarsch@...%3cmailto:cmarsch@...>> >> wrote:
>
> Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor
10?
>
> Christopher W. Marsch
> IT/Database Administrator
> Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> 19E British American Blvd.
> Latham, NY 12110
> (518) 399-3616 x272
> Cell: (518) 795-0200
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
8
> We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> Would be great for performance and development.
>
> I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to
start from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate
OpenEdge code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single
BAQ, and product configurator would have to be completely rewritten as
well as every configurator written by users.

Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and
talent issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies
ask, "If I'm going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new
one that will have growing pains or should I look at a company with
more experience in the arena?"

Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's
just so much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to
take a lot to sanitize it out.

Mark W.
9
As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress from
the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they decide to
have the same product with 2 completely different development teams, which I
find to be unlikely but not entirely out of the realm of a possibility.

I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate Progress.
I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the backend of
SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the majority of Epicor
customers, Progress is by far the better option for them on their backend.

I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though for the
next release, only because they have been working with the same code base
with updates and changes for what I would consider 6 versions at this
point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and a complete from scratch
re-write would allow for much cleaner code from the start, which would trim
down the product and make it faster all around.

What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to do to
affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I don't think
anyone outside the execs and development teams can really tell us.

Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same program
and characters but different director from the original, and all the users
will be divided on which is really better...


-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Mark Wonsil
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10

> We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> Would be great for performance and development.
>
> I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be
riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.

It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to start
from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate OpenEdge
code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single BAQ, and product
configurator would have to be completely rewritten as well as every
configurator written by users.

Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and talent
issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies ask, "If I'm
going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new one that will have
growing pains or should I look at a company with more experience in the
arena?"

Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's just so
much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to take a lot to
sanitize it out.

Mark W.


------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
10
Believe it or not, the code base is actually much older than the 8.0 release. It dates back to the mid nineties when Vantage was a Progress only product. Epicor migrated the GUI to C# when Progress moved its platform to an object oriented Open Edge from the prior 4GL. In fact, remnants of the 4GL code still exist in the .p files on the server.

What I find a bit perplexing about the Epicor 10 speculation is why would any company spend the resources for a transformational product rewrite simply to end at the status quo. Where is the ROI for nothing more than a platform change? Then there is the problem of essentially customer abandonment. Why, for example, would Epicor continue to produce product releases for HPUX and Linux? Would the customers presumably valuable enough to produce these releases be simply casts offs with the new version?

While I don�t discount the possibility, to undertake the massive effort to rewrite the product into a new platform would be a remarkably technological tone deaf exercise. Epicor would be far better served to patch the current product and rewrite for the cloud and no not Epicor Express�. Then they would have a traditional client server product they could continue to sell to their on premisses client base and also have a low cost of entry and recurring revenue product for the market at large.

Michael

Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
http://www.aspacia.com/

On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ned <TechnoBabbly@...> wrote:

> As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress from
> the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they decide to
> have the same product with 2 completely different development teams, which I
> find to be unlikely but not entirely out of the realm of a possibility.
>
> I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate Progress.
> I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the backend of
> SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the majority of Epicor
> customers, Progress is by far the better option for them on their backend.
>
> I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though for the
> next release, only because they have been working with the same code base
> with updates and changes for what I would consider 6 versions at this
> point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and a complete from scratch
> re-write would allow for much cleaner code from the start, which would trim
> down the product and make it faster all around.
>
> What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to do to
> affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I don't think
> anyone outside the execs and development teams can really tell us.
>
> Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same program
> and characters but different director from the original, and all the users
> will be divided on which is really better...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Mark Wonsil
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10
>
> > We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
> instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> > Would be great for performance and development.
> >
> > I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to be
> riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.
>
> It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to start
> from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate OpenEdge
> code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single BAQ, and product
> configurator would have to be completely rewritten as well as every
> configurator written by users.
>
> Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and talent
> issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies ask, "If I'm
> going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new one that will have
> growing pains or should I look at a company with more experience in the
> arena?"
>
> Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's just so
> much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to take a lot to
> sanitize it out.
>
> Mark W.
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
> already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11
I have spoken with a few rather senior level developers and managers. They confirmed that Epicor 10 is in process and target currently for 4th quarter 2013. They would not confirm the removal of progress but stated that Epicor 10 will be "shortening the stack." The call stack currently contains a number of layers, and Epicor 10 reduces this. One possibility is to remove the progress layer. I'm not sure what other options exist, but the working lingo is "shortening the stack."

Tom Christie | Information Technology Manager | AGM Container Controls, Inc. | tchristie@... | t: 520.881.2130 ext 2176


-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Barry
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:09 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Epicor 10

Believe it or not, the code base is actually much older than the 8.0 release. It dates back to the mid nineties when Vantage was a Progress only product. Epicor migrated the GUI to C# when Progress moved its platform to an object oriented Open Edge from the prior 4GL. In fact, remnants of the 4GL code still exist in the .p files on the server.

What I find a bit perplexing about the Epicor 10 speculation is why would any company spend the resources for a transformational product rewrite simply to end at the status quo. Where is the ROI for nothing more than a platform change? Then there is the problem of essentially customer abandonment. Why, for example, would Epicor continue to produce product releases for HPUX and Linux? Would the customers presumably valuable enough to produce these releases be simply casts offs with the new version?

While I don't discount the possibility, to undertake the massive effort to rewrite the product into a new platform would be a remarkably technological tone deaf exercise. Epicor would be far better served to patch the current product and rewrite for the cloud and no not Epicor Express.. Then they would have a traditional client server product they could continue to sell to their on premisses client base and also have a low cost of entry and recurring revenue product for the market at large.

Michael

Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
http://www.aspacia.com/

On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ned <TechnoBabbly@...> wrote:

> As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress
> from the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they
> decide to have the same product with 2 completely different
> development teams, which I find to be unlikely but not entirely out of the realm of a possibility.
>
> I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate Progress.
> I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the
> backend of SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the
> majority of Epicor customers, Progress is by far the better option for them on their backend.
>
> I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though
> for the next release, only because they have been working with the
> same code base with updates and changes for what I would consider 6
> versions at this point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and
> a complete from scratch re-write would allow for much cleaner code
> from the start, which would trim down the product and make it faster all around.
>
> What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to
> do to affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I
> don't think anyone outside the execs and development teams can really tell us.
>
> Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same
> program and characters but different director from the original, and
> all the users will be divided on which is really better...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Mark Wonsil
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10
>
> > We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
> instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> > Would be great for performance and development.
> >
> > I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to
> > be
> riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.
>
> It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to
> start from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate
> OpenEdge code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single
> BAQ, and product configurator would have to be completely rewritten as
> well as every configurator written by users.
>
> Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and
> talent issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies
> ask, "If I'm going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new
> one that will have growing pains or should I look at a company with
> more experience in the arena?"
>
> Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's
> just so much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to
> take a lot to sanitize it out.
>
> Mark W.
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
> )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
> and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
12
I am fairly certain progress is going mostly away in 10
On Apr 30, 2013 2:30 PM, "Tom J. Christie" <tchristie@...>
wrote:

> **
>
>
> I have spoken with a few rather senior level developers and managers. They
> confirmed that Epicor 10 is in process and target currently for 4th quarter
> 2013. They would not confirm the removal of progress but stated that Epicor
> 10 will be "shortening the stack." The call stack currently contains a
> number of layers, and Epicor 10 reduces this. One possibility is to remove
> the progress layer. I'm not sure what other options exist, but the working
> lingo is "shortening the stack."
>
> Tom Christie | Information Technology Manager | AGM Container Controls,
> Inc. | tchristie@... | t: 520.881.2130 ext 2176
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Michael Barry
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:09 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Epicor 10
>
> Believe it or not, the code base is actually much older than the 8.0
> release. It dates back to the mid nineties when Vantage was a Progress only
> product. Epicor migrated the GUI to C# when Progress moved its platform to
> an object oriented Open Edge from the prior 4GL. In fact, remnants of the
> 4GL code still exist in the .p files on the server.
>
> What I find a bit perplexing about the Epicor 10 speculation is why would
> any company spend the resources for a transformational product rewrite
> simply to end at the status quo. Where is the ROI for nothing more than a
> platform change? Then there is the problem of essentially customer
> abandonment. Why, for example, would Epicor continue to produce product
> releases for HPUX and Linux? Would the customers presumably valuable enough
> to produce these releases be simply casts offs with the new version?
>
> While I don't discount the possibility, to undertake the massive effort to
> rewrite the product into a new platform would be a remarkably technological
> tone deaf exercise. Epicor would be far better served to patch the current
> product and rewrite for the cloud and no not Epicor Express.. Then they
> would have a traditional client server product they could continue to sell
> to their on premisses client base and also have a low cost of entry and
> recurring revenue product for the market at large.
>
> Michael
>
> Michael Barry
> Aspacia Systems Inc
> 866.566.9600
> 312.803.0730 fax
> http://www.aspacia.com/
>
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ned <TechnoBabbly@...> wrote:
>
> > As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress
> > from the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they
> > decide to have the same product with 2 completely different
> > development teams, which I find to be unlikely but not entirely out of
> the realm of a possibility.
> >
> > I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate
> Progress.
> > I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the
> > backend of SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the
> > majority of Epicor customers, Progress is by far the better option for
> them on their backend.
> >
> > I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though
> > for the next release, only because they have been working with the
> > same code base with updates and changes for what I would consider 6
> > versions at this point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and
> > a complete from scratch re-write would allow for much cleaner code
> > from the start, which would trim down the product and make it faster all
> around.
> >
> > What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to
> > do to affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I
> > don't think anyone outside the execs and development teams can really
> tell us.
> >
> > Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same
> > program and characters but different director from the original, and
> > all the users will be divided on which is really better...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> > Behalf Of Mark Wonsil
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10
> >
> > > We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
> > instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> > > Would be great for performance and development.
> > >
> > > I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to
> > > be
> > riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.
> >
> > It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to
> > start from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate
> > OpenEdge code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single
> > BAQ, and product configurator would have to be completely rewritten as
> > well as every configurator written by users.
> >
> > Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and
> > talent issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies
> > ask, "If I'm going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new
> > one that will have growing pains or should I look at a company with
> > more experience in the arena?"
> >
> > Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's
> > just so much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to
> > take a lot to sanitize it out.
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> > have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
> > )
> > (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
> > and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> > (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> > (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
> already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
13
Seriously? Aside from the fact that �shortening the stack� sounds like something the weight conscious would do at iHop, what are the real possibilities with this strategy? They�re going to move the business logic to the already bloated client code or, more likely, rewrite the BO�s as server side code and jettison the middle tier altogether. Either option seems like the technical equivalent of a compulsory rescreening of Back To The Future without the hover board.

I�m really trying to fight off one of those �You kids get off my lawn� luddite moments here, but I�m really not looking forward to administering that E10 install on my Windows Server 2012 touch screen...


Michael

Michael Barry
Aspacia Systems Inc
866.566.9600
312.803.0730 fax
http://www.aspacia.com/

On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:30 AM, Tom J. Christie <tchristie@...> wrote:

> I have spoken with a few rather senior level developers and managers. They confirmed that Epicor 10 is in process and target currently for 4th quarter 2013. They would not confirm the removal of progress but stated that Epicor 10 will be "shortening the stack." The call stack currently contains a number of layers, and Epicor 10 reduces this. One possibility is to remove the progress layer. I'm not sure what other options exist, but the working lingo is "shortening the stack."
>
> Tom Christie | Information Technology Manager | AGM Container Controls, Inc. | tchristie@... | t: 520.881.2130 ext 2176
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Barry
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:09 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Epicor 10
>
> Believe it or not, the code base is actually much older than the 8.0 release. It dates back to the mid nineties when Vantage was a Progress only product. Epicor migrated the GUI to C# when Progress moved its platform to an object oriented Open Edge from the prior 4GL. In fact, remnants of the 4GL code still exist in the .p files on the server.
>
> What I find a bit perplexing about the Epicor 10 speculation is why would any company spend the resources for a transformational product rewrite simply to end at the status quo. Where is the ROI for nothing more than a platform change? Then there is the problem of essentially customer abandonment. Why, for example, would Epicor continue to produce product releases for HPUX and Linux? Would the customers presumably valuable enough to produce these releases be simply casts offs with the new version?
>
> While I don't discount the possibility, to undertake the massive effort to rewrite the product into a new platform would be a remarkably technological tone deaf exercise. Epicor would be far better served to patch the current product and rewrite for the cloud and no not Epicor Express.. Then they would have a traditional client server product they could continue to sell to their on premisses client base and also have a low cost of entry and recurring revenue product for the market at large.
>
> Michael
>
> Michael Barry
> Aspacia Systems Inc
> 866.566.9600
> 312.803.0730 fax
> http://www.aspacia.com/
>
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ned <TechnoBabbly@...> wrote:
>
> > As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress
> > from the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they
> > decide to have the same product with 2 completely different
> > development teams, which I find to be unlikely but not entirely out of the realm of a possibility.
> >
> > I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate Progress.
> > I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the
> > backend of SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the
> > majority of Epicor customers, Progress is by far the better option for them on their backend.
> >
> > I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though
> > for the next release, only because they have been working with the
> > same code base with updates and changes for what I would consider 6
> > versions at this point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and
> > a complete from scratch re-write would allow for much cleaner code
> > from the start, which would trim down the product and make it faster all around.
> >
> > What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to
> > do to affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I
> > don't think anyone outside the execs and development teams can really tell us.
> >
> > Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same
> > program and characters but different director from the original, and
> > all the users will be divided on which is really better...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> > Behalf Of Mark Wonsil
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10
> >
> > > We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
> > instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> > > Would be great for performance and development.
> > >
> > > I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to
> > > be
> > riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.
> >
> > It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to
> > start from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate
> > OpenEdge code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single
> > BAQ, and product configurator would have to be completely rewritten as
> > well as every configurator written by users.
> >
> > Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and
> > talent issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies
> > ask, "If I'm going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new
> > one that will have growing pains or should I look at a company with
> > more experience in the arena?"
> >
> > Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's
> > just so much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to
> > take a lot to sanitize it out.
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> > have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
> > )
> > (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
> > and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> > (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> > (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14
Haha touche
On Apr 30, 2013 3:27 PM, "Michael Barry" <mbarry@...> wrote:

> Seriously? Aside from the fact that �shortening the stack� sounds like
> something the weight conscious would do at iHop, what are the real
> possibilities with this strategy? They�re going to move the business logic
> to the already bloated client code or, more likely, rewrite the BO�s as
> server side code and jettison the middle tier altogether. Either option
> seems like the technical equivalent of a compulsory rescreening of Back To
> The Future without the hover board.
>
> I�m really trying to fight off one of those �You kids get off my lawn�
> luddite moments here, but I�m really not looking forward to administering
> that E10 install on my Windows Server 2012 touch screen...
>
>
> Michael
>
> Michael Barry
> Aspacia Systems Inc
> 866.566.9600
> 312.803.0730 fax
> http://www.aspacia.com/
>
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:30 AM, Tom J. Christie <tchristie@...>
> wrote:
>
> > I have spoken with a few rather senior level developers and managers.
> They confirmed that Epicor 10 is in process and target currently for 4th
> quarter 2013. They would not confirm the removal of progress but stated
> that Epicor 10 will be "shortening the stack." The call stack currently
> contains a number of layers, and Epicor 10 reduces this. One possibility is
> to remove the progress layer. I'm not sure what other options exist, but
> the working lingo is "shortening the stack."
> >
> > Tom Christie | Information Technology Manager | AGM Container
> Controls, Inc. | tchristie@... | t: 520.881.2130 ext 2176
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Michael Barry
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:09 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vantage] Epicor 10
> >
> > Believe it or not, the code base is actually much older than the 8.0
> release. It dates back to the mid nineties when Vantage was a Progress only
> product. Epicor migrated the GUI to C# when Progress moved its platform to
> an object oriented Open Edge from the prior 4GL. In fact, remnants of the
> 4GL code still exist in the .p files on the server.
> >
> > What I find a bit perplexing about the Epicor 10 speculation is why
> would any company spend the resources for a transformational product
> rewrite simply to end at the status quo. Where is the ROI for nothing more
> than a platform change? Then there is the problem of essentially customer
> abandonment. Why, for example, would Epicor continue to produce product
> releases for HPUX and Linux? Would the customers presumably valuable enough
> to produce these releases be simply casts offs with the new version?
> >
> > While I don't discount the possibility, to undertake the massive effort
> to rewrite the product into a new platform would be a remarkably
> technological tone deaf exercise. Epicor would be far better served to
> patch the current product and rewrite for the cloud and no not Epicor
> Express.. Then they would have a traditional client server product they
> could continue to sell to their on premisses client base and also have a
> low cost of entry and recurring revenue product for the market at large.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > Michael Barry
> > Aspacia Systems Inc
> > 866.566.9600
> > 312.803.0730 fax
> > http://www.aspacia.com/
> >
> > On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Ned <TechnoBabbly@...> wrote:
> >
> > > As much as some people may salivate over the idea of removing Progress
> > > from the equation, I don't think that is going to happen unless they
> > > decide to have the same product with 2 completely different
> > > development teams, which I find to be unlikely but not entirely out of
> the realm of a possibility.
> > >
> > > I am also not sure that it is beneficial to everyone to eliminate
> Progress.
> > > I know there is a pretty big bias by many people who prefer the
> > > backend of SQL, but for many smaller companies, which are really the
> > > majority of Epicor customers, Progress is by far the better option for
> them on their backend.
> > >
> > > I do think that it would be beneficial to start from scratch though
> > > for the next release, only because they have been working with the
> > > same code base with updates and changes for what I would consider 6
> > > versions at this point(8.0, 8.03, 8.03.400, 9.04, 9.05, 9.05.700) and
> > > a complete from scratch re-write would allow for much cleaner code
> > > from the start, which would trim down the product and make it faster
> all around.
> > >
> > > What we don't really know is what the Activant integration is going to
> > > do to affect whatever is coming out next, that's the wildcard that I
> > > don't think anyone outside the execs and development teams can really
> tell us.
> > >
> > > Maybe they will just come out with an Epicor Sequel Version, same
> > > program and characters but different director from the original, and
> > > all the users will be divided on which is really better...
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> > > Behalf Of Mark Wonsil
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:12 PM
> > > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 10
> > >
> > > > We are excited to hear that 10 may be going to 100% SQL and C#/.NET
> > > instead of having the Progress layer in the middle.
> > > > Would be great for performance and development.
> > > >
> > > > I'm concerned, though, that a framework change that big is going to
> > > > be
> > > riddled with (even more) bugs for a few releases.
> > >
> > > It is a VERY big project to remove Progress. Actually, you'd have to
> > > start from scratch. The whole SDK is built around tools that generate
> > > OpenEdge code. You'd have to rewrite every single BPM, every single
> > > BAQ, and product configurator would have to be completely rewritten as
> > > well as every configurator written by users.
> > >
> > > Progress users would be staring at new hardware requirements and
> > > talent issues. The price would may be large enough to have companies
> > > ask, "If I'm going to an all Microsoft solution, would I want a new
> > > one that will have growing pains or should I look at a company with
> > > more experience in the arena?"
> > >
> > > Having the Business Objects is a huge start for Epicor but there's
> > > just so much Progress code in the product that's it's really going to
> > > take a lot to sanitize it out.
> > >
> > > Mark W.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> > > have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
> > > )
> > > (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
> > > and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> > > (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> > > (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> > (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
> and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> > (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> > (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
15
Jose writes:

> I am fairly certain progress is going mostly away in 10

Yeah, it's shaping up this way. I searched for Progress -> C#
translators and found this on the testimonial page of a company named
Ispier:

http://www.ispirer.com/about-us/testimonials

They write MANY platform translators and SQLWays is the one used by Epicor.

Mark W.
16
Mr. Barry writes:
> They’re going to move the business logic to the already bloated client code or, more likely, rewrite the BO’s
> as server side code and jettison the middle tier altogether. Either option seems like the technical equivalent
> of a compulsory rescreening of Back To The Future without the hover board.

But do the Cubs still win the World Series in 2015?

I got to think they believe that the generated code by the SDK is not
giving them the best performance. However, will taking generated code
and running it through a translator that will generate more code
create faster and less buggy code?

:-|

When we purchased vantage 8, I was impressed that Epicor took the time
the separate the presentation layer from the business layer. We used
the business objects to load our database well before there was a DMT.
It was a fantastic feature. However, BAQs, advanced BPMs, and the
Product Configurator let Progress 4GL seep upstream. That's going to
make this a big project. Maybe it will be a better package but it will
take some time before the bugs are out. Code wrote from scratch
generally tends to be buggier than code that evolves.

"Get off my application layer!"

Mark W.
17
After Insights is over, someone who attended should post an update if anything is said about 10.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "jgiese1988" <jgiese@...> wrote:
>
> Premature send - Anyways, obviously Sept-Oct is only speculation and not a hard fast time frame. I would expect that Insights might shed more light on a date for 10 if they are close. Hearing it from Epicor would be far better than third or fourth hand me :)
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Giese <jgiese@> wrote:
> >
> > I've been told from an unnamed source they are looking at Sept Oct release
> >
> >
> >
> > Joshua Giese
> >
> > CTO
> >
> > 920.437.6400 Ext. 337
> >
> > Site ID: 27450-E905700B2-SQL64
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "Chris Marsch" <cmarsch@>
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Vantage Discussion List (VANTAGE@)" <VANTAGE@>
> > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 3:49:33 PM
> > Subject: [Vantage] Epicor 10
> >
> >
> >
> > Has anyone heard any information on a possible release date for Epicor 10?
> >
> > Christopher W. Marsch
> > IT/Database Administrator
> > Mechanical Dynamics & Analysis, Ltd.
> > 19E British American Blvd.
> > Latham, NY 12110
> > (518) 399-3616 x272
> > Cell: (518) 795-0200
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
18
Hi All,

So now that E10 is released, are the beta testers allowed to discuss specifics?
If yes, are there any on this list that would be willing to share your thoughts?




Joe Rojas | Director of Information Technology | Mats Inc
dir: 781-573-0291 | cell: 781-408-9278 | fax: 781-232-5191

addr: 37 Shuman Ave | Stoughton | Ma | 02072-3734
jrojas@... | www.matsinc.com
Ask us about our clean, green and beautiful matting and flooring

[cid:7b6f48.png@c4416d23.438c6086]
This message is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
19

What would you like to know?

 

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joe Rojas
Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 2:08 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Epicor 10

 

 

Hi All,

So now that E10 is released, are the beta testers allowed to discuss specifics?
If yes, are there any on this list that would be willing to share your thoughts?




Joe Rojas | Director of Information Technology | Mats Inc
dir: 781-573-0291 | cell: 781-408-9278 | fax: 781-232-5191

addr: 37 Shuman Ave | Stoughton | Ma | 02072-3734
jrojas@... | www.matsinc.com
Ask us about our clean, green and beautiful matting and flooring

[cid:7b6f48.png@c4416d23.438c6086]
This message is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

20

Can I connect to it with Excel and Access?  ;-)

 

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Gercar
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 2:16 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: Epicor 10

 

 

What would you like to know?

 

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joe Rojas
Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 2:08 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Epicor 10

 

 

Hi All,

So now that E10 is released, are the beta testers allowed to discuss specifics?
If yes, are there any on this list that would be willing to share your thoughts?




Joe Rojas | Director of Information Technology | Mats Inc
dir: 781-573-0291 | cell: 781-408-9278 | fax: 781-232-5191

addr: 37 Shuman Ave | Stoughton | Ma | 02072-3734
jrojas@... | www.matsinc.com
Ask us about our clean, green and beautiful matting and flooring

[cid:7b6f48.png@c4416d23.438c6086]
This message is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]