02-08-2011 12:00 PM
Currently Act 2010 with 2011 already purchased.
Using Office 2011 as a catalyst (but could be any reason).
I view the upgrade process as pretty freaking hostile. Sure, if you have one or two licenses, it's pleasant enough. But if you have 10-20 then it's a real burden. I looked for a method to automate the install. The best that Sage has is a Silent Install that still requires me to touch every machine. In addition, one of the requirements is that no version of Act be on the machine???
Don't you think that _planning_ on only new customers is a bad business decision?
Given that Sage is aimed at smaller businesses, it should be a logical jump to assume that only one person will be doing the installs. That's certainly the case here. Now I've got to waste a maint ngiht sneakernetting 15 desktop installs.
PROTIP for SAGE: All desktop software should be packaged so that it can be administratively installed without touching the individual desktops. If not, you waste the time of the folks that determine whether we continue to do business with you.
02-08-2011 12:41 PM
I agree... one of the issues is that many of the issues are related to the Microsoft components that ACT! uses.
You might post a request for this feature to be considered for a future version here -
Input from this web page goes directly into a database that management has direct access to read, and which they also track and gather statistics on. It also allows other users to vote on these so Sage can get an idea of the demand
You might also have a look at this article on how feature request decisions are made:
02-08-2011 01:27 PM
I have placed this as a feature request, but honestly I won't hold my breath. Sage must seems pretty content to refine and comb the same 30 feet of beach over and over vs new features. From my perspective, their greatest strength seems to be hiring polite staff that can deliver "no our product does not do X" in a professional manner.
From administrative installs, calculating (this is supposed to be leveraging a database for goodness sakes), field dependencies, performing operations en masse, linking that doesn't spawn from the mind of a guy that loves to click several times for each contact....the list goes on. I'm told that we can suggest these items as improvements. What does get added? Hoovers! Jeebus. Why not add myspace and friendster integration and get a trifecta of useless fail?
02-08-2011 01:49 PM
02-08-2011 02:12 PM