On Friday, it’s EpiUsers Frideas Day! Have you been to the Epicor Ideas Portal recently? If so, are there some ideas you want to encourage other users to vote for? Maybe want to add comments to an existing idea? Election season is upon a large percentage of the globe, so VOTE.
Why do programmers like dark mode?
Because bugs are attracted to the light.
Some great discussions about dark mode and landing pages this week. Check it out at the new URL.
https://epicor.ideas.aha.io/
I guess I’ll go write mine up tomorrow.
So, is this where I get to shamelessly beg for votes on my idea(s)?
This is my only one, and it is a big one for our company:
Add Tree Display Customization to Kinetic UI | Epicor Ideas Portal (aha.io)
Another user recently asked about this same feature, so at least I’m not the only one… but I don’t get the impression that it’s high on Epicor’s to-do list. Part of me I wants to tag Tim Shoemaker and ask to kick it up the priority list it but I’m not that kind of guy… 
As I explained in the other thread this week, it’s important to us to be able to customize the fields displayed in the engineering tree because all of our part numbers are ‘dumb’, in that they are just a unique identifier, and don’t tell us anything about the part(s) we are working with. When all we see in the Tree is the PartNum value, it forces us to look at Materials or Subassemblies in a grid/list view to see more information like the description, drawing number, etc.
I thought the MES stations would be a good first place for me to try migrating to Kinetic, since we have 0 customization on it.
However, the only functions the majority of the people need to do, clocking in and clocking out is way too tiny. No way I am going live on that. Not only that but I couldn’t even find the buttons when I went into application studio so there wasn’t any way to increase the size or change the location that I could easily figure out.
Data Collection / MES (Shop Floor) – Make login UI more prominent and touch friendly
When the Outbound Container box is enabled on the PCID Configuration, the material handlers can’t override the PCID during the picking process. As a result, they either have to re-arrange all of the goods until they find the specific PCID that Epicor wants or go back and Unallocate and then Allocate again for the specific PCID that they want to take instead.
If the Outbound Container box is not enabled, the material handler can substitute a different PCID while picking the the suggested one is not easily available. Significant efficiency loss for multiple people in that scenario.
Allow Override of PCID During Picking When Outbound Container is Enabled
I’m all for more power, but if you get it be careful.
The shipping workers will at some point abuse that to avoid picking the correct inventory and you will end up with inventory aging issues.
Fair point, and I agree. In this particular case, inventory aging is not a problem, but the point is valid. I’m just hoping that they make it work just like serial tracking, lot tracking, or even the rest of PCID that has Outbound Container off. It seems an accidental exception.
If anybody else wants the Part landing page back (they took it away in 2024.1), it looks like there is a window open right now for feedback on this idea:
Log In - Epicor Identity “Bring back landing page for part list”
I added this as a comment on the idea as well. This seems to be the best of both worlds. I can see people being pretty divided on landing pages.
Maybe this could be a toggle of some sort, and that would allow the individual (install, not user) to determine if they want a landing page on a given form or not? It could work like the Launch Classic Form checkbox in Menu Maintenance. Launch With Landing Page.
My question is, do we want a landing page or a better first page experience with search?
For example, if I open a form with only a few records and the record that I want is on that “landing page”, it’s a win. Click and go. But if I need to find a record, maybe from my last session, it would be cool to show the last X opened/added/modified, then a preloaded grid is also quite useful. But if I’m looking for a group of parts, now I’m into the search. The landing page was nice to be able to filter through records but it’s highly inefficient to download all those records, especially for people far away from the server (cloud and other remote users).
To get to Chad’s vision, it might be possible to add a Search Panel Card at the top of the form that serves the same purpose as the landing page. As a Panel Card, it could be customized to load the number of records and the columns desired with some predetermined filter or removed completely, essentially giving the toggle capability.
I understand why people didn’t want all those records returned, but I don’t know that I would have given it the King’s Landing treatment.
This 100%.
I keep having to customize each app to skip the landing page because the performance is so slow on some of them. Just give us more options to show or hide for each app.
This ^^^ OR just fix the performance… Then we get everything we want.
grid filtering is done client side? 
Pagination seems 100% broken…
And many of the grids (not just landing pages) download far more info than is displayed. As an example, the Sales Order Entry landing page immediately starts download 79 records when I open it. 10 columns are displayed, but 537 columns are downloaded for the browser to handle. I get including more data for simpler personalization/customization out of the box, but that’s over 42k pieces of data to display 720 items.
The main grid of base Fulfillment Workbench has I think 29 columns - but the REST call returns almost 300 columns… So a request that returns 500 records has 150k pieces of data … and the browser just doesn’t handle that very well - at least not on our machines.
Maybe I’m crazy and it doesn’t make a difference, but especially on a grid that a user doesn’t want/care about - or one that has terrible performance (FFWB) - it seems like it must make a difference.