The senario is a client of mine has some, lets say, difficult IT gatekeepers, thus running ACT! For Web (APFW) on a hosted virtual server was approved by them rather than installing onto their onpremise server and workstations. Awesome, notch up a win.
Everyone can login via their browser, awesome, notch up a win.
Oh, ACT! does Emarketing!, awesome, notch up a win, argh... hold on, whoa up pardner... if you want to use ACT! Emarketing you gotta use the desktop client. Says one person "but ACT! for web is running in a browser right?", so I reply, "Yes indeed it is.".
Says this person "and ACT! Emarketing uses SwiftPage in the back end, right?", to which I reply, "Yes indeed it is.".
Says this person "it is 2012 is it not?", again I reply "Yes indeed it is.".
Says they "then why for does this not work? why can not we use APFW and ACT! Emarketing together to send out our communications to our clients?". Says I "awesomely good question, let me take this along with a sacrifice and beg of the development deities an answer as to why, in fact, let's not worry about the 'why', let's just ask, 'WHEN'?"
Thusly we now arrive at the pointy end of my rant where I ask the all important question: When will we be able to APFW and ACT! Emarketing together?
PS. Now I'm sure that some very clever person who is fueled up on some brightly coloured energy drink will point out to me that they could just Remote Desktop to the Virtual Server and do it from there. To which I would reply that this is last weeks bandaid applied to todays wound. Doing so would add a painful amount of friction to the workflow. I've got a client that wants to use APFW. They want to use ACT! Emarketing. They want to have multiple users use ACT! Emarketing. I was getting quite excited, until the realisation that currently the two shall not play nicely together.
PPS. I've said enough for now, other than please kudo this if you would benefit from these two working together. If you wouldn't benefit, then why are you still here? move along, mind your step.