Further Epicor ranting

[system]

At 12:52 PM 10/9/2000 , you wrote:

>priority for that item is. HEY EPICOR, how about a top 100 list of the most
>important things that you plan to do with VANTAGE. Things that affect
>CURRENT USERS with CURRENT PROBLEMS.

We'll get to that as soon as we're done porting to MS SQL server. That's
what future victims [doh!] ...ahem.... customers want.

[system]

There is a "glich" in Vantage / Data Collection that causes "grace"
periods set at the end of shifts NOT to be recognized if an employee
is performing an indirect activity when the shift ends. This tends to
be a pain, as you have to go back after each shift and adjust these
employees time, if you can't get them stopped exactly "on the minute".
Epicor has assigned this "upgrade" #AXL14018, but I have been
politely
told that it will be addressed on the basis of "severity and demand".
If I am a lone wolf in this, fine. If you are having the same
problem,
get a reply back to me, which I will pass along to development, to try
and get this item brought up in the pecking order. Thanks
tas04@...

[system]

So they agree it IS a bug but they are "Politely" telling you that it will
only be fixed if the "severity and demand" dictate it be fixed.

Translation: Unless enough companies call in and complain this "Bug" will
be deemed an annoyance and not fixed.

Maybe it's just me but there has to be a better way of handling these
conversations.

How about EPICOR maintaining 3 lists of user "Suggestions":

1) Minor bugs that appear not to effect a majority of the customers and
that are not critical in nature.
2) Major bugs that are critical in nature and/or effect a majority of
customers.
3) Suggestions by customers to "Enhance" the way the product works.

Then let all of the customers vote at one time via the WEB on each of the
three lists. AKA the website that EPICOR just posted for us to vote on
"Enhancements" for the next release.

I'd be surprised if this "Bug" even shows up on the next voting list. It's
already be deemed a minor issue and usually only major issues show up for a
vote.

Yes, I realize that including all reports bugs and suggestions will make
these lists long but at least all "Suggestions" would see the light of day.

I would rather have EPICOR just come right out and tell me that what I
perceive as a big bug is from their point of view a class 1 - minor bug. If
I know that it will show up on the next vote I can at least try to state my
case via this list and try to get some of the end users to vote yes when
they vote. Otherwise they may not know the bug exists until they find it.

Oh well, just one opinion from the fringe ...

Todd Anderson
J. Rubin & Co.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Smith [mailto:tas04@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:39 AM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


There is a "glich" in Vantage / Data Collection that causes "grace"
periods set at the end of shifts NOT to be recognized if an employee
is performing an indirect activity when the shift ends. This tends to
be a pain, as you have to go back after each shift and adjust these
employees time, if you can't get them stopped exactly "on the minute".
Epicor has assigned this "upgrade" #AXL14018, but I have been
politely
told that it will be addressed on the basis of "severity and demand".
If I am a lone wolf in this, fine. If you are having the same
problem,
get a reply back to me, which I will pass along to development, to try
and get this item brought up in the pecking order. Thanks
tas04@...



eGroups Sponsor
<http://click.egroups.com/1/8657/13/_/411782/_/970846730/>


<http://adimg.egroups.com/img/8657/13/_/411782/_/970846730/468x60_Family.gif

>

We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
<http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/>
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

In my opinion any reported bug should be fixed whether there is large demand
or not. I pay a hefty chunk of change for "coterminous maintenance". If I
find a bug that affects my organizations ability to effectively use Vantage,
it darn well better get fixed regardless of demand.

-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Anderson [mailto:tanderson@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:42 PM
To: 'vantage@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


So they agree it IS a bug but they are "Politely" telling you that it will
only be fixed if the "severity and demand" dictate it be fixed.

Translation: Unless enough companies call in and complain this "Bug" will
be deemed an annoyance and not fixed.

Maybe it's just me but there has to be a better way of handling these
conversations.

How about EPICOR maintaining 3 lists of user "Suggestions":

1) Minor bugs that appear not to effect a majority of the customers and
that are not critical in nature.
2) Major bugs that are critical in nature and/or effect a majority of
customers.
3) Suggestions by customers to "Enhance" the way the product works.

Then let all of the customers vote at one time via the WEB on each of the
three lists. AKA the website that EPICOR just posted for us to vote on
"Enhancements" for the next release.

I'd be surprised if this "Bug" even shows up on the next voting list. It's
already be deemed a minor issue and usually only major issues show up for a
vote.

Yes, I realize that including all reports bugs and suggestions will make
these lists long but at least all "Suggestions" would see the light of day.

I would rather have EPICOR just come right out and tell me that what I
perceive as a big bug is from their point of view a class 1 - minor bug. If
I know that it will show up on the next vote I can at least try to state my
case via this list and try to get some of the end users to vote yes when
they vote. Otherwise they may not know the bug exists until they find it.

Oh well, just one opinion from the fringe ...

Todd Anderson
J. Rubin & Co.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Smith [mailto:tas04@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:39 AM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


There is a "glich" in Vantage / Data Collection that causes "grace"
periods set at the end of shifts NOT to be recognized if an employee
is performing an indirect activity when the shift ends. This tends to
be a pain, as you have to go back after each shift and adjust these
employees time, if you can't get them stopped exactly "on the minute".
Epicor has assigned this "upgrade" #AXL14018, but I have been
politely
told that it will be addressed on the basis of "severity and demand".
If I am a lone wolf in this, fine. If you are having the same
problem,
get a reply back to me, which I will pass along to development, to try
and get this item brought up in the pecking order. Thanks
tas04@...



eGroups Sponsor
<http://click.egroups.com/1/8657/13/_/411782/_/970846730/>


<http://adimg.egroups.com/img/8657/13/_/411782/_/970846730/468x60_Family.gif

>

We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
<http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/>
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)




We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

Todd,

My opinion is this:

How can you put a valid priority on bugs? They may seem little to the
programmer but not to the (in this example) the labor data entry person that
has to go through numerous employees double checking the #@#%$#$ data
collection data gathered by Vantage. The whole concept behind data
collection is improved accuracy!! We work to get the information into the
system correctly and the system screws it up!! Where is that a minor bug.
We are talking about pretty important information that affects job costs,
inventory, and payroll. This is not the only "little" bug in the data
collection system!!! Numerous rounding problems occur and time unaccounted
for. I, for one, am tired of paying the extreme maintenance prices for
software that does not function as it should and plagued with "minor" bugs.
We all pay these exuberant costs and are told that these will not be fixed
and to live with it!!! This IS NOT acceptable.

As a programmer, these little bugs are not that hard to fix. If they can
duplicate them they should be able to go into the code and know right where
to look!! They just spend too much time developing new releases that only
create additional "minor" bugs!!! I sometimes feel that the better
programmers or the ones who created the original programs are not the same
that get stuck looking for the "minor" bugs. Thus you have less qualified
people attempting to fix what the top dogs developed, see the problem!

I especially getting tired of hearing that "if enough people complain", they
will fix it. We all paid good money to buy this program and pay large
annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced by a
confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program, we should have a fix in our
hand that day!!! If they would give higher priority to these minor things,
think how soon the software would begin to work as it was intended. Maybe
even free up some of the tech support guys from being inundated with
repeated reports of the same bug and callbacks regarding their fix status.
Not to mention happier customers!!!

My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal with them.
For Epicor to say this is minor and will not be fixed, is BS. A bug is a
bug, big or small.

Regards

Darren Mann
Miller Products Co.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Anderson [mailto:tanderson@...]
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:40 AM
> To: 'vantage@egroups.com'
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor
>
>
> So they agree it IS a bug but they are "Politely" telling you
> that it will
> only be fixed if the "severity and demand" dictate it be fixed.
>
> Translation: Unless enough companies call in and complain
> this "Bug" will
> be deemed an annoyance and not fixed.
>
> Maybe it's just me but there has to be a better way of handling these
> conversations.
>
> How about EPICOR maintaining 3 lists of user "Suggestions":
>
> 1) Minor bugs that appear not to effect a majority of the
> customers and
> that are not critical in nature.
> 2) Major bugs that are critical in nature and/or effect a
> majority of
> customers.
> 3) Suggestions by customers to "Enhance" the way the product works.
>
> Then let all of the customers vote at one time via the WEB on
> each of the
> three lists. AKA the website that EPICOR just posted for us
> to vote on
> "Enhancements" for the next release.
>
> I'd be surprised if this "Bug" even shows up on the next
> voting list. It's
> already be deemed a minor issue and usually only major issues
> show up for a
> vote.
>
> Yes, I realize that including all reports bugs and
> suggestions will make
> these lists long but at least all "Suggestions" would see the
> light of day.
>
> I would rather have EPICOR just come right out and tell me that what I
> perceive as a big bug is from their point of view a class 1 -
> minor bug. If
> I know that it will show up on the next vote I can at least
> try to state my
> case via this list and try to get some of the end users to
> vote yes when
> they vote. Otherwise they may not know the bug exists until
> they find it.
>
> Oh well, just one opinion from the fringe ...
>
> Todd Anderson
> J. Rubin & Co.
>

[system]

Todd and Darren:

You wrote: "... We all paid good money to buy this program and pay large
annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced by a
confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program,...If they would give higher
priority to these minor things, think how soon the software would begin to
work as it was intended. ...free up some of the tech support...Not to
mention happier customers!!!

My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal with them."

You are so on target with this statement! This is the biggest black eye a
software company can get-treating things as minor when they are day-to-day
problems. It's not a show-stopper, but it irritates you 10 times a week. A
major bug might bring everything to a screeching halt, but when it's fixed,
it's over. You don't think about it 6 weeks down the line, when that other
day-to-day item has now come past your vision 60 times!

Maybe this is a point we should all pound and hound 'em about at the
conference this year.

Lydia

[system]

This effects us as well and is one reason we have not pulled the trigger for
4.0. Maybe the next time someone from Epicor Sales calls for a reference I
should tell them politely that it would be based upon the "severity and
demand" of their need to make a sale......

That might light a fire under someones backside.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Smith [mailto:tas04@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:39 AM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


There is a "glich" in Vantage / Data Collection that causes "grace"
periods set at the end of shifts NOT to be recognized if an employee
is performing an indirect activity when the shift ends. This tends to
be a pain, as you have to go back after each shift and adjust these
employees time, if you can't get them stopped exactly "on the minute".
Epicor has assigned this "upgrade" #AXL14018, but I have been
politely
told that it will be addressed on the basis of "severity and demand".
If I am a lone wolf in this, fine. If you are having the same
problem,
get a reply back to me, which I will pass along to development, to try
and get this item brought up in the pecking order. Thanks
tas04@...


-

[system]

Well said!!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Mann [mailto:dmann@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:15 PM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


Todd,

My opinion is this:

How can you put a valid priority on bugs? They may seem little to the
programmer but not to the (in this example) the labor data entry person that
has to go through numerous employees double checking the #@#%$#$ data
collection data gathered by Vantage. The whole concept behind data
collection is improved accuracy!! We work to get the information into the
system correctly and the system screws it up!! Where is that a minor bug.
We are talking about pretty important information that affects job costs,
inventory, and payroll. This is not the only "little" bug in the data
collection system!!! Numerous rounding problems occur and time unaccounted
for. I, for one, am tired of paying the extreme maintenance prices for
software that does not function as it should and plagued with "minor" bugs.
We all pay these exuberant costs and are told that these will not be fixed
and to live with it!!! This IS NOT acceptable.

As a programmer, these little bugs are not that hard to fix. If they can
duplicate them they should be able to go into the code and know right where
to look!! They just spend too much time developing new releases that only
create additional "minor" bugs!!! I sometimes feel that the better
programmers or the ones who created the original programs are not the same
that get stuck looking for the "minor" bugs. Thus you have less qualified
people attempting to fix what the top dogs developed, see the problem!

I especially getting tired of hearing that "if enough people complain", they
will fix it. We all paid good money to buy this program and pay large
annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced by a
confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program, we should have a fix in our
hand that day!!! If they would give higher priority to these minor things,
think how soon the software would begin to work as it was intended. Maybe
even free up some of the tech support guys from being inundated with
repeated reports of the same bug and callbacks regarding their fix status.
Not to mention happier customers!!!

My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal with them.
For Epicor to say this is minor and will not be fixed, is BS. A bug is a
bug, big or small.

Regards

Darren Mann
Miller Products Co.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Anderson [mailto:tanderson@...]
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:40 AM
> To: 'vantage@egroups.com'
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor
>
>
> So they agree it IS a bug but they are "Politely" telling you
> that it will
> only be fixed if the "severity and demand" dictate it be fixed.
>
> Translation: Unless enough companies call in and complain
> this "Bug" will
> be deemed an annoyance and not fixed.
>
> Maybe it's just me but there has to be a better way of handling these
> conversations.
>
> How about EPICOR maintaining 3 lists of user "Suggestions":
>
> 1) Minor bugs that appear not to effect a majority of the
> customers and
> that are not critical in nature.
> 2) Major bugs that are critical in nature and/or effect a
> majority of
> customers.
> 3) Suggestions by customers to "Enhance" the way the product works.
>
> Then let all of the customers vote at one time via the WEB on
> each of the
> three lists. AKA the website that EPICOR just posted for us
> to vote on
> "Enhancements" for the next release.
>
> I'd be surprised if this "Bug" even shows up on the next
> voting list. It's
> already be deemed a minor issue and usually only major issues
> show up for a
> vote.
>
> Yes, I realize that including all reports bugs and
> suggestions will make
> these lists long but at least all "Suggestions" would see the
> light of day.
>
> I would rather have EPICOR just come right out and tell me that what I
> perceive as a big bug is from their point of view a class 1 -
> minor bug. If
> I know that it will show up on the next vote I can at least
> try to state my
> case via this list and try to get some of the end users to
> vote yes when
> they vote. Otherwise they may not know the bug exists until
> they find it.
>
> Oh well, just one opinion from the fringe ...
>
> Todd Anderson
> J. Rubin & Co.
>

We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

Amen Darren,

I'm sure you've all experienced instances where your problems have
been met with a similar response. I have recently faced the same
answer with a problem of mine. It may seem insignificant to most of
you, but the problem I ran into is simply an example of bad
programming. When I called to explain the problem I found, Epicor
told me to alter my data because they probably wouldn't consider this
important enough to fix. Here is what we were trying to do:

We wanted to modify both our packing slips to the customer &
subcontractor to include the package description. I was able to add
the package table into the Customer Packing Slip, join the table
using Package Code, and everything worked fine. When I went to do
the same to the subcontract packing slip it didn't work. It seems
the pkgcode field in the subshipd.dbf is only 3 characters, while the
same field in Progress and the shipdtl.dbf is 8 characters. So in
order to make this work I had to change all my codes to 3 characters,
which I guess is livable, but some of our customers supply us
returnable containers and they have their own codes for their
containers, many of which are longer than 3 characters. Epicor's
explanation was that they were trying improve performance by limiting
the amount of data that gets dumped to the dbf. Of course they
offered me the choice of custom programming, gee thanks, we have paid
you enough already, we have to pay more to fix your mistakes.

Sorry for the outburst, but I only wish the people in my company who
decided to buy this software had a chance to hear how unhappy so many
of Epicor's customers are before we shelled out the dough. I realize
this problem won't be life or death for anybody, but it should be a
very simple problem to fix. I guess I just want to reaffirm Darren's
opinion that all bugs should be considered important and be given a
look at. Epicor should make the software they've sold us work before
worrying about selling us something else that doesn't.

Brian Stenglein

--- In vantage@egroups.com, Darren Mann <dmann@m...> wrote:
> Todd,
>
> My opinion is this:
>
> How can you put a valid priority on bugs? They may seem little to
the
> programmer but not to the (in this example) the labor data entry
person that
> has to go through numerous employees double checking the #@#%$#$
data
> collection data gathered by Vantage. The whole concept behind data
> collection is improved accuracy!! We work to get the information
into the
> system correctly and the system screws it up!! Where is that a
minor bug.
> We are talking about pretty important information that affects job
costs,
> inventory, and payroll. This is not the only "little" bug in the
data
> collection system!!! Numerous rounding problems occur and time
unaccounted
> for. I, for one, am tired of paying the extreme maintenance prices
for
> software that does not function as it should and plagued
with "minor" bugs.
> We all pay these exuberant costs and are told that these will not
be fixed
> and to live with it!!! This IS NOT acceptable.
>
> As a programmer, these little bugs are not that hard to fix. If
they can
> duplicate them they should be able to go into the code and know
right where
> to look!! They just spend too much time developing new releases
that only
> create additional "minor" bugs!!! I sometimes feel that the better
> programmers or the ones who created the original programs are not
the same
> that get stuck looking for the "minor" bugs. Thus you have less
qualified
> people attempting to fix what the top dogs developed, see the
problem!
>
> I especially getting tired of hearing that "if enough people
complain", they
> will fix it. We all paid good money to buy this program and pay
large
> annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced
by a
> confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program, we should have a fix
in our
> hand that day!!! If they would give higher priority to these minor
things,
> think how soon the software would begin to work as it was
intended. Maybe
> even free up some of the tech support guys from being inundated with
> repeated reports of the same bug and callbacks regarding their fix
status.
> Not to mention happier customers!!!
>
> My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal
with them.
> For Epicor to say this is minor and will not be fixed, is BS. A
bug is a
> bug, big or small.
>
> Regards
>
> Darren Mann
> Miller Products Co.
>

[system]

Todd, Darren, & Lydia;



I agree with all that has been said. Our sales rep. has gotten a couple of
ears full and we still aren't happy. Bugs of any magnitude should be
"FIXED" as soon as possible, not the squeaky wheel getting the attention.



I recall recently someone asking questions about the EDI module. We have
made some headway with 830 material releases, but 856 ASN's are a joke in
Vantage. Plus, when discussing possible custom fixes Epicor as much as
admitted that our customization would likely be used as enhancements in a
future release. So we get to pay for their R & D, I THINK NOT.



Warren.Eddy@...

219 478-2363 ext 217





-----Original Message-----
From: Lydia Coffman [mailto:lcoffman@...]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:33 PM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Data Collection Indirect Labor


Todd and Darren:



You wrote: "... We all paid good money to buy this program and pay large

annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced by a

confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program,...If they would give higher

priority to these minor things, think how soon the software would begin to

work as it was intended. ...free up some of the tech support...Not to

mention happier customers!!!



My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal with them."



You are so on target with this statement! This is the biggest black eye a

software company can get-treating things as minor when they are day-to-day

problems. It's not a show-stopper, but it irritates you 10 times a week. A

major bug might bring everything to a screeching halt, but when it's fixed,

it's over. You don't think about it 6 weeks down the line, when that other

day-to-day item has now come past your vision 60 times!



Maybe this is a point we should all pound and hound 'em about at the

conference this year.



Lydia








We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/

(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

I can't tell you how much I agree with what you all have said. Epicor's
performance regarding fixes has been very bad since the DCD days. There are
so many of us that have put in many long hours to uncover what the problems
are and what could be done to fix them, only to have all of that work fall
on deaf and ungrateful ears!

There is a problem with this and I would like to propose a solution. By our
complaing about this on the Onelist we aren't getting heard where we need
to. The only thing that will come of any tirade that we have here is
someone at Epicor will read this thread and say, to upper management, "The
natives are restless". I propose that we get together as a user group and
make a formal complaint to Epicor about the treatment that we get. <Insert
highly motivational speech about strengh in numbers> I will be glad to
follow up with Epicor regarding this. We have enough member companies to go
to Epicor and tell them that if things don't get better we will STOP paying
our support. Dollars talk in any business. Please let me know what you
think.

Here is another thing to consider, think of all of the colossal software
companies that no longer exist. Ashton-Tate (dBase), WordPerfect, Borland,
and Lotus. All of these had huge market shares and thought that they owned
their respective customer base. They all felt like they could dictate what
the customer wanted or needed. Where are they now? You would think that
someone at Epicor (and Microsoft) would get it!

Personally, I feel that they need to hire people that have used thier
software and have had to deal with thier company. That would be the only
way to really change what is bothering all of us. I've never felt like
anyone there has taken my problems seriously enough to really do something
about it and that comment is made after being a user of Vantage for 6 years.
They've only gotten worse as they've gotten bigger. When people ask me
know, I tell them that Vantage is a good product, but it could be a great
product.

Anyways, there is my 2 cents worth. Let me know what you think!

Ted Kitch
tedkitch@...

On Fri, 06 Oct 2000 19:14:31 -0000, vantage@egroups.com wrote:

> Amen Darren,
>
> I'm sure you've all experienced instances where your problems have
> been met with a similar response. I have recently faced the same
> answer with a problem of mine. It may seem insignificant to most of
> you, but the problem I ran into is simply an example of bad
> programming. When I called to explain the problem I found, Epicor
> told me to alter my data because they probably wouldn't consider this
> important enough to fix. Here is what we were trying to do:
>
> We wanted to modify both our packing slips to the customer &
> subcontractor to include the package description. I was able to add
> the package table into the Customer Packing Slip, join the table
> using Package Code, and everything worked fine. When I went to do
> the same to the subcontract packing slip it didn't work. It seems
> the pkgcode field in the subshipd.dbf is only 3 characters, while the
> same field in Progress and the shipdtl.dbf is 8 characters. So in
> order to make this work I had to change all my codes to 3 characters,
> which I guess is livable, but some of our customers supply us
> returnable containers and they have their own codes for their
> containers, many of which are longer than 3 characters. Epicor's
> explanation was that they were trying improve performance by limiting
> the amount of data that gets dumped to the dbf. Of course they
> offered me the choice of custom programming, gee thanks, we have paid
> you enough already, we have to pay more to fix your mistakes.
>
> Sorry for the outburst, but I only wish the people in my company who
> decided to buy this software had a chance to hear how unhappy so many
> of Epicor's customers are before we shelled out the dough. I realize
> this problem won't be life or death for anybody, but it should be a
> very simple problem to fix. I guess I just want to reaffirm Darren's
> opinion that all bugs should be considered important and be given a
> look at. Epicor should make the software they've sold us work before
> worrying about selling us something else that doesn't.
>
> Brian Stenglein
> --- In vantage@egroups.com, Darren Mann <dmann@m...> wrote:
> > Todd,
> >
> > My opinion is this:
> >
> > How can you put a valid priority on bugs? They may seem little to
> the
> > programmer but not to the (in this example) the labor data entry
> person that
> > has to go through numerous employees double checking the #@#%$#$
> data
> > collection data gathered by Vantage. The whole concept behind data
> > collection is improved accuracy!! We work to get the information
> into the
> > system correctly and the system screws it up!! Where is that a
> minor bug.
> > We are talking about pretty important information that affects job
> costs,
> > inventory, and payroll. This is not the only "little" bug in the
> data
> > collection system!!! Numerous rounding problems occur and time
> unaccounted
> > for. I, for one, am tired of paying the extreme maintenance prices
> for
> > software that does not function as it should and plagued
> with "minor" bugs.
> > We all pay these exuberant costs and are told that these will not
> be fixed
> > and to live with it!!! This IS NOT acceptable.
> >
> > As a programmer, these little bugs are not that hard to fix. If
> they can
> > duplicate them they should be able to go into the code and know
> right where
> > to look!! They just spend too much time developing new releases
> that only
> > create additional "minor" bugs!!! I sometimes feel that the better
> > programmers or the ones who created the original programs are not
> the same
> > that get stuck looking for the "minor" bugs. Thus you have less
> qualified
> > people attempting to fix what the top dogs developed, see the
> problem!
> >
> > I especially getting tired of hearing that "if enough people
> complain", they
> > will fix it. We all paid good money to buy this program and pay
> large
> > annual fees, with that in mind if even one of us is inconvenienced
> by a
> > confirmed bug (Major or Minor) in the program, we should have a fix
> in our
> > hand that day!!! If they would give higher priority to these minor
> things,
> > think how soon the software would begin to work as it was
> intended. Maybe
> > even free up some of the tech support guys from being inundated with
> > repeated reports of the same bug and callbacks regarding their fix
> status.
> > Not to mention happier customers!!!
> >
> > My point, ALL bugs are important to the people that have to deal
> with them.
> > For Epicor to say this is minor and will not be fixed, is BS. A
> bug is a
> > bug, big or small.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Darren Mann
> > Miller Products Co.
> >
>
>


Ted Kitch
tedkitch@...





_______________________________________________________
Say Bye to Slow Internet!
http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html

[system]

Here's what I was sent in May, and I was told that it would be fixed in rel
5.0. If you read the last paragraph, it appears that they have determined
the problem and suggested how to fix it but HAVE NOT ACTUALLY FIXED IT!!!

Regards,
Jerry L. Solobay


Jerry:
Here is the Grace Period/Indirect Labor document.
Phil
Berglund, Vantage Support

************************************************************
*** Page ID: 340.263
*** Product: VANTAGE
************************************************************
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: Customers (3.00.613) both report that company
configuration's data collection module - Consider Grace for Labor Detail -
checkbox is not working with indirect labor.
Able to duplicate in 3.00.614 using employee 250 for 1/31/99.
Steps to duplicate:
1. Set up shift 99 - Start 8:00, End 10:30 and Lunch 9:15 to 9:20.
2. Clocked employee into an indirect code (CLEN) in workcenter (ASM).
3. At 10:35 I clocked the employee out of the activity and clocked them
out for the day.
4. Grace period for clock-out late was set for 12 minutes in company
config before starting this test.
5. From Job Mgmt>Gen Ops>Labor Entry screen, employee 250 for 1/31/99
shows in the time and attendance review, the correct adjusted clock out time
of 10:30.
6. The labor detail at the bottom of the screen shows a clock-out of
10:35 which is incorrect. It should have been adjusted to 10:30 as well. The
system handles production and setup labor transactions correctly, it will
adjust the labor detail back to 10:30. However, it does not seem to
functioning correctly for indirect hours.

PROBLEM RESOLUTION: This issue is open in Development on Axl 14018.
----- Axl Problem Description -----
When AXL 10921 (the Rio Labor Grace project) added grace periods for labor
detail records, it changed the de/dee10-ed.w (end direct labor)
clock-out-time procedure to check for grace time to the nearest minute. But
de/dee10-ei.w (end indirect labor) also had a clock-out-time procedure that
was not changed. So the indirect labor will not match the grace period
unless the end time is exactly on the minute (with no extra seconds or
hundredths). Rather than keep two copies of the same code, you may want to
put the correct procedure into one file called by both programs.

[system]

Todd, Darren, Lydia, Eddy, Ted, Jerry,

I couldn't agree more with your statements. I actually wrote this
note several weeks ago but refrained from posting it to the group,
now it seems appropriate. Apparently I am not the only user who
feels this way. Epicor had better wake up! Maybe they could get
some tips from Slobodan Milosevic!

Okay, I have tried to be quiet but I can't stand it anymore. I know
Epicor is watching and I know that one of the rules of this group is
not to trash Epicor but has anyone stopped to think how much Epicor
has made from it's customers? As near as I can figure, an average
Vantage customer pays somewhere between $70,000 to $100,000 just to
get Vantage up and running (this might be a modest estimate for some
of you) not to mention annual payments. So for every 10 to 15
customers Epicor rakes in $1,000,000 (that's one million dollars in
case you missed a zero somewhere). So my point is why do Vantage
customers have to wish, beg, borrow and steal to get Vantage up and
running, why must they join a user group and correspond to other
Vantage users about how they wish that the Vantage would work
properly. Why must we all pay outrageous and exorbitant prices for
custom programming? Why doesn't Epicor concentrate on fixing the
problems that they have with the current Vantage product instead of
trying to conquer every region in Africa? I am sure that I am not
alone when I say that for the most part I really like Vantage but
many of the postings that I have read in the past week have to do
with the lack of functionality in Vantage. For a premium product
such as Vantage I find this unacceptable. By now I am sure that I am
blacklisted and that somewhere at Epicor there is a manila folder
with my name on it. Let this serve as a wake-up call for Epicor that
possibly their customers are not as happy as they would like to think
they are and if enough customers are unsatisfied with them they will
eventually find another product. The computer market is very
dynamic, new software products emerge everyday, so I hope that Epicor
will strive to perfect their products and that the only postings to
this user group will be about how well Vantage performs. Am I the
only one who feels this way? Epicor is watching, so now is the time
and onelist is the place to reply to this post and tell them how you
feel.

[system]

I agree. When I joined my company 18 months ago, they were ready to
place a software order with Brand X. I found that the company had not
checked out Brand X close enough and what I believed had not done their
homework looking at other options. Therefore, we again looked at
another 4 or 5 products. When checking references provided by Brand X's
sales department, the references couldn't stand their product. Knowing
that usually references generally are supportive of products, the
Vantage references praised Vantage and Dataworks customer service. So
we switched and got Vantage. I've gotten a lot of flack from our
President on some of the problems we have encountered with Vantage, how
some parts of the system don't work as expected and how some of the
programs should work, but don't. A couple of weeks age we joined
egroups and I don't dare share some of the problems and concerns I've
read on this screen. I think the software industry is pretty sad when
they have to take the position that once they have your big bucks, they
know they don't have to help everybody as it is much more costly for
their customers to change software.

I do believe that we are still better off than having Brand X. I
believe things will improve. I do believe that Epicore needs to
establish a priority of providing customer service to their existing
customers rather than spending most of their engineering efforts on new
product integration.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Eury [SMTP:beury@...]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 8:59 AM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: Data Collection Indirect Labor

Todd, Darren, Lydia, Eddy, Ted, Jerry,

I couldn't agree more with your statements. I actually wrote
this
note several weeks ago but refrained from posting it to the
group,
now it seems appropriate. Apparently I am not the only user who

feels this way. Epicor had better wake up! Maybe they could
get
some tips from Slobodan Milosevic!

Okay, I have tried to be quiet but I can't stand it anymore. I
know
Epicor is watching and I know that one of the rules of this
group is
not to trash Epicor but has anyone stopped to think how much
Epicor
has made from it's customers? As near as I can figure, an
average
Vantage customer pays somewhere between $70,000 to $100,000 just
to
get Vantage up and running (this might be a modest estimate for
some
of you) not to mention annual payments. So for every 10 to 15
customers Epicor rakes in $1,000,000 (that's one million dollars
in
case you missed a zero somewhere). So my point is why do
Vantage
customers have to wish, beg, borrow and steal to get Vantage up
and
running, why must they join a user group and correspond to other

Vantage users about how they wish that the Vantage would work
properly. Why must we all pay outrageous and exorbitant prices
for
custom programming? Why doesn't Epicor concentrate on fixing
the
problems that they have with the current Vantage product instead
of
trying to conquer every region in Africa? I am sure that I am
not
alone when I say that for the most part I really like Vantage
but
many of the postings that I have read in the past week have to
do
with the lack of functionality in Vantage. For a premium
product
such as Vantage I find this unacceptable. By now I am sure that
I am
blacklisted and that somewhere at Epicor there is a manila
folder
with my name on it. Let this serve as a wake-up call for Epicor
that
possibly their customers are not as happy as they would like to
think
they are and if enough customers are unsatisfied with them they
will
eventually find another product. The computer market is very
dynamic, new software products emerge everyday, so I hope that
Epicor
will strive to perfect their products and that the only postings
to
this user group will be about how well Vantage performs. Am I
the
only one who feels this way? Epicor is watching, so now is the
time
and onelist is the place to reply to this post and tell them how
you
feel.



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor

We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report
Files, please go to the following link:
http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you
try it, go to www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password,
choose My Groups, choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the
password, the link above will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

After reading this thread I felt to compelled to express my opinion. We
migrated to Vantage about a year ago from a legacy product written in Cobol
that was so proprietary that changes and updates were extremely had to bring
about. The product became stagnate and was living on software maintenance
dollars while the rest of the industry leap frog ahead. This forced user to
make a costly transition to more modern product . Based on my past I am
impressed with Epicors commitment to continually refining and update their
product. I know people that have implemented SAP and Baan spending millions
of dollars and have some of the very same issue that I have heard expressed
recently. I will agree that there are issues with Vantage that need to be
resolved. I find myself wondering if using negative criticism is the best
way to resolve our concerns with Epicor. I feel that input from the user
groups and the various product focus groups to convey a more unified message
might be more effective rather than random pot shots at Epicor. As the
saying goes "Been there done that" things could be a whole lot worse.

Dan Shallbetter
States Electric Mfg.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Eury [mailto:beury@...]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 7:59 AM
To: vantage@egroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: Data Collection Indirect Labor


Todd, Darren, Lydia, Eddy, Ted, Jerry,

I couldn't agree more with your statements. I actually wrote this
note several weeks ago but refrained from posting it to the group,
now it seems appropriate. Apparently I am not the only user who
feels this way. Epicor had better wake up! Maybe they could get
some tips from Slobodan Milosevic!

Okay, I have tried to be quiet but I can't stand it anymore. I know
Epicor is watching and I know that one of the rules of this group is
not to trash Epicor but has anyone stopped to think how much Epicor
has made from it's customers? As near as I can figure, an average
Vantage customer pays somewhere between $70,000 to $100,000 just to
get Vantage up and running (this might be a modest estimate for some
of you) not to mention annual payments. So for every 10 to 15
customers Epicor rakes in $1,000,000 (that's one million dollars in
case you missed a zero somewhere). So my point is why do Vantage
customers have to wish, beg, borrow and steal to get Vantage up and
running, why must they join a user group and correspond to other
Vantage users about how they wish that the Vantage would work
properly. Why must we all pay outrageous and exorbitant prices for
custom programming? Why doesn't Epicor concentrate on fixing the
problems that they have with the current Vantage product instead of
trying to conquer every region in Africa? I am sure that I am not
alone when I say that for the most part I really like Vantage but
many of the postings that I have read in the past week have to do
with the lack of functionality in Vantage. For a premium product
such as Vantage I find this unacceptable. By now I am sure that I am
blacklisted and that somewhere at Epicor there is a manila folder
with my name on it. Let this serve as a wake-up call for Epicor that
possibly their customers are not as happy as they would like to think
they are and if enough customers are unsatisfied with them they will
eventually find another product. The computer market is very
dynamic, new software products emerge everyday, so I hope that Epicor
will strive to perfect their products and that the only postings to
this user group will be about how well Vantage performs. Am I the
only one who feels this way? Epicor is watching, so now is the time
and onelist is the place to reply to this post and tell them how you
feel.



We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
<http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/>
(Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go to
www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My Groups,
choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link above
will work the next time you try it.)




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

[system]

Dan, believe me, I have been working with Vantage almost 5 years now and
after all I've seen, taking pot shots is not only called for, it might even
be EFFECTIVE since nothing else ever has worked. I wnet to my first user
conference in Minneapolis 5 yrs ago and heard the exact same complaint then,
again, at the first conf. in Vegas two yrs ago, there was almost an uprising
over this exact issue. It is clear they don't CARE what the users think,
hence my company saved a ton of cash this year by just staying home instead
of going to hear everyone bash a company that is more interested in putting
on a showy conference than in improving their customer satisfaction by
actually making it WORK!
Great product, miserable management!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Shallbetter [SMTP:dans@...]
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 8:46 AM
> To: 'vantage@egroups.com'
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] RE: Data Collection Indirect Labor
>
> After reading this thread I felt to compelled to express my opinion. We
> migrated to Vantage about a year ago from a legacy product written in
> Cobol
> that was so proprietary that changes and updates were extremely had to
> bring
> about. The product became stagnate and was living on software maintenance
> dollars while the rest of the industry leap frog ahead. This forced user
> to
> make a costly transition to more modern product . Based on my past I am
> impressed with Epicors commitment to continually refining and update their
> product. I know people that have implemented SAP and Baan spending
> millions
> of dollars and have some of the very same issue that I have heard
> expressed
> recently. I will agree that there are issues with Vantage that need to be
> resolved. I find myself wondering if using negative criticism is the best
> way to resolve our concerns with Epicor. I feel that input from the user
> groups and the various product focus groups to convey a more unified
> message
> might be more effective rather than random pot shots at Epicor. As the
> saying goes "Been there done that" things could be a whole lot worse.
>
> Dan Shallbetter
> States Electric Mfg.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Eury [mailto:beury@...]
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 7:59 AM
> To: vantage@egroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] RE: Data Collection Indirect Labor
>
>
> Todd, Darren, Lydia, Eddy, Ted, Jerry,
>
> I couldn't agree more with your statements. I actually wrote this
> note several weeks ago but refrained from posting it to the group,
> now it seems appropriate. Apparently I am not the only user who
> feels this way. Epicor had better wake up! Maybe they could get
> some tips from Slobodan Milosevic!
>
> Okay, I have tried to be quiet but I can't stand it anymore. I know
> Epicor is watching and I know that one of the rules of this group is
> not to trash Epicor but has anyone stopped to think how much Epicor
> has made from it's customers? As near as I can figure, an average
> Vantage customer pays somewhere between $70,000 to $100,000 just to
> get Vantage up and running (this might be a modest estimate for some
> of you) not to mention annual payments. So for every 10 to 15
> customers Epicor rakes in $1,000,000 (that's one million dollars in
> case you missed a zero somewhere). So my point is why do Vantage
> customers have to wish, beg, borrow and steal to get Vantage up and
> running, why must they join a user group and correspond to other
> Vantage users about how they wish that the Vantage would work
> properly. Why must we all pay outrageous and exorbitant prices for
> custom programming? Why doesn't Epicor concentrate on fixing the
> problems that they have with the current Vantage product instead of
> trying to conquer every region in Africa? I am sure that I am not
> alone when I say that for the most part I really like Vantage but
> many of the postings that I have read in the past week have to do
> with the lack of functionality in Vantage. For a premium product
> such as Vantage I find this unacceptable. By now I am sure that I am
> blacklisted and that somewhere at Epicor there is a manila folder
> with my name on it. Let this serve as a wake-up call for Epicor that
> possibly their customers are not as happy as they would like to think
> they are and if enough customers are unsatisfied with them they will
> eventually find another product. The computer market is very
> dynamic, new software products emerge everyday, so I hope that Epicor
> will strive to perfect their products and that the only postings to
> this user group will be about how well Vantage performs. Am I the
> only one who feels this way? Epicor is watching, so now is the time
> and onelist is the place to reply to this post and tell them how you
> feel.
>
>
>
> We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
> please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
> <http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/>
> (Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go
> to
> www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My
> Groups,
> choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the link
> above
> will work the next time you try it.)
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> We no longer allow attachments to files. To access/share Report Files,
> please go to the following link: http://www.egroups.com/files/vantage/
> (Note: If this link does not work for you the first time you try it, go
> to www.egroups.com, login and be sure to save your password, choose My
> Groups, choose Vantage, then choose Files. If you save the password, the
> link above will work the next time you try it.)

[system]

I believe that I've viewed all the comments for this particular thread. The
main thing that kept coming back to me is, What ARE epicor's priorities for
debug, enhance and upgrade? Surely, somewhere or someone in the Epicor
heirarchy has a consolidated listing of things to do and what their
priority for that item is. HEY EPICOR, how about a top 100 list of the most
important things that you plan to do with VANTAGE. Things that affect
CURRENT USERS with CURRENT PROBLEMS.

Shirley H. Graver
Systems Administrator
Rubber Associates Inc. (Certified to QS9000/ISO9002)
Cleveland/Akron, Ohio





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