I have a client that uses Adagio for everything, except they revert to ACCPAC IC/OE because they use ScanPac.

ScanPac's main feature is the ability to maintain cross-referenced item codes (typically the UPC code) in a database. Any screen that will accept an item number will also accept the cross-referenced code, and translate it to the real item number. The cross-referenced code can be entered via the keyboard or scanned in from a scanner.

ScanPac has the ability to handle multiple cross-referenced item codes per item, but I don't think this client needs more than one.

Finally, ScanPac has a function to print out barcoded labels with both the real and the cross-referenced item codes.

Is there any possibility that this kind of functionality will find its way into Adagio before Adagio breaks compatibility with ACCPAC Plus OE and IC?

Thanks

Steve

Hi Steve,

Are you trying to determine whether any other Adagio users need this functionality?

Yes, but I'm also trying to make a suggestion for improvement that might be a good selling point to prospects as well as users. ScanPac was very good in its day, and any program that is still being used 10 years after it was killed must have some features worth looking at. I know you are always looking for features to add to Adagio.

Steve

OK - but this is a Technical Support Forum, and a good place to post suggestions is here on the suggestions page under the "Contact Us" off our home page.

In answer to your question, Adagio Receivables V9.0 breaks compatibility with Accpac Plus, so clients wishing to use its new features will have to use Adagio OrderEntry. The odds of ScanPac functionality being added before AR 9.0 ships is nil.

Sorry.

I think that quite often Tech Support issues morph into suggestions.

Maybe there should be a "Suggestion" forum as it would be good to get feed back on the various suggestions and might also give Softrak some further insight to the level of priority that the community as a whole gives to certain suggestions.

Pete

BTW - The ScanPac type functionality would be great for allowing EUs to cross reference Their Own Part Numbers with those of their suppliers.

This would allow them to benefit from a coding system that makes sense for them and organises their inventory lists etc. properly while allowing data entry to be by In-house or Supplier Item Number.

I know that there's already a field for this but it's not very useful right now.

Sorry Andrew, my apologies for continuing the suggestion here.

Hi Pete,

Yes, I agree that some form of barcoding functionality would be useful. So would Customer Item cross-reference lists, Vendor Item cross-reference lists, and Item lookup by description. All (or at least most) of these will have to wait for IC 9.0. Not to mention re-order quantity by location, costing by location, UniBuild functionality, "unbuild" a BOM, kitting....

OK - the list is enormous (and keeps growing)

The release note for Adagio Receivables V9.0 looks like it might be 35 pages long (OK - I'm exagerating), but that's because I couldn't stop suggesting improvements that were reasonable and some of these had to be done because this is probably the only time in the next 5 years that we'll be updating every single module that "touches" Receivables (9 modules require updates so far).

On a bright note - the development work on Adagio Receivables is almost complete, as are the requisite upgrades to Adagio Invoices and Adagio SalesAnalysis. Adagio BankRec needs to be finished before we can start using Receivables in house, and we'd like to do that for at least a month before shipping. We're trying hard for around Christmas (which probably means early in January so we don't spoil everyone's holidays).

Regarding your suggestion about posting suggested improvements for comment, we are looking at implementing something on our web site to implement this. I'll post a note when we've got it running.

Thanks for all your support.

Hi Andrew

Not to sound like too much of a complainer, but my clients are paying a lot of money in Upgrade Plan renewal fees in order to support your development efforts. This year has been a hard one to justify to those clients, since there has been only one upgrade in 2008 of any significance (if you call the OE 8.1B upgrade significant).

Because I have for the most part convinced my clients that it is in their best interest to pay an annual fee so that they can be assured that Adagio doesn't become a dinosaur, my clients are not balking. But it doesn't make me feel good that other products are improving at a much faster rate, and that the list of important suggestions for improvement is long and growing longer.

I guess what I'm saying is that I wish there were a way you could speed up development, by throwing more resources at it. Your current pace is not good enough, in my opinion.

Again, sorry for being so negative - you know I love Adagio and I think highly of everyone there.

Steve

Hi Steve,

Sorry, but I don't really feel that $20.83/module/month is really all that much money, and, while you might think that 8.1 upgrade that provides Vista compatibilty is "not significant", it was an enormous amount of work for which your clients will be grateful at some point.

Experienced programmers are virtually impossible to hire, and we are fortunate in having a group available to us that has great insight into the needs of our clients. Once we start shipping AR 9.0, you'll see a regular stream of Upgrades that have some excellent features in all the modules (we think). The new features list for Receivables itself is enormous (too large really, but I'm responsible for that).

For your clients looking for a specific feature, there's always the option of having Softrak or Dakota provide that functionality in the timeframe you desire as a custom modification, but that customization costs money (which is the equivalent of "throwing more resources" at the problem).

We really are working as fast as we can. Of course, we could always skip the testing phase of the product, that might result in a faster release

Steve:

IMS's LabelPrint will do bar code labels.

I agree we need a ScanPak/PBT Pro (which did the same thing) replacement. I keep running across prospect with this on their must have list.

I was talking to Dakota Software about this last week as he had been asked about a Pic n Pac replacement. This functionality already exists in RF Pathways but I was trying to encourage him to consider doing the PBT Pro replacement. Send them a line adding your request to mine.