Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Comments
by
on ‎09-25-2011 02:43 PM

Kevin ... if only it was designed by people who had to rely on ACT! for their business...

 

Regards,
Mike Lazarus
ACT! Evangelist
GL Computing, Australia
http://about.me/GLComputing
http://Blog.GLComputing.com.au
http://twitter.com/GLComputing

GL Computing Facebook Page - http://www.facebook.com/GLComputing
LinkedIN ACT! Fanatics Group - http://www.linkedin.com/groups/ACT-Fanatics-49896

by Oldlaxdude
on ‎09-26-2011 01:32 PM

Do they not have any "sales" people in sage.

How about the number of processes that are company centric

 

Being a relational database, Act shouldn't be so rigid.

 

If I had the time I would build an Access program

or bring back Goldmine personal editions

by Oldlaxdude
on ‎09-26-2011 01:35 PM

(as a follow up)

 

The amount of hours I have spent trying to perform simple task and getting act to work properly, I probably could have learned code & built a CRM in Access/outlook Smiley Happy

 

by JM
on ‎09-28-2011 05:27 PM

Going back to your initial Post:

Why is one click too many on the Contact Detail record's Company field that has earlier been linked to a Company Record to bring up the company details?

You would be better off creating more contact record fields for your Company information, add a TAB to the Contact Detail layout inset those new fields or if room stuff them in the top half of Contact Detail view.  Or using third party add-on to have a tab that resides in the top half of contact detail.

 

Why is two clicks from Contact Detail selecting Contacts drop down, select Create Company from Contact;  too many clicks or work to create a Company Detail record?

After that company record is created if you have a contact list view of contacts to link them to the Company from Contact Detail click on the button after the Company field.

 

You state a duplication of data (that is similar or exact) between a Company record and the Contact record.  Why do you even create Company record if the same for multiple Contact records that have different contact names and phone#'s?

You would be better off using in ACT 2011 the Relationship Tab and associate all the contact records to a primary contact record.

After that if you like, (as I do)  need to make changes to fields for all the secondary contacts related, so they have same data use Exponenciel.com Copy Data add-on.  This way I related all contacts to one contact and in the contact detail layout where I place the Copy Data box I click on the showing primary contact record who's data gets copied to specified fields for each contact record.

 

Sorry it does not help not knowing what you really are using the Company Detail Table for?

JM

by Bronze Contributor chieff
on ‎09-28-2011 06:38 PM

JM, I do create and use Company Records.  Company Records are the perfect way to bring the Notes, Histories, Attachments, Activities and Opportunities for all connected contacts together into one unified location so that you can get an account view.   I only use Secondary contacts for very casual contacts, since you can't look them up by their own names, ACT! won't attach incoming or outgoing emails to Secondary Contacts, you can't do any type of mail-merge to Secondary Contacts.  No, Secondary Contacts are definitely Second-class citizens, as I teach my students.  And I use Relationships to connect clients and their consultants or IT companies, as an example.  Relationships is a peer-to-peer model, while Company & Contact is a Parent-Child - the one true way to connect employees to their employer.

 

I complain about adding identical fields to both the Company & Contact Tables (records) because it runs contrary to Database Normalization, specifically, the duplication of identical data in more than one table - that's a violation of Codd's 1st Normal Form (1NF).

by Oldlaxdude
on ‎10-15-2012 08:25 AM

While my business is partially contact centric, it is also COMPANY centric.

 

The contacts in the company may come and go but the company remains.

 

Like many who have commented, if it can be done in Access, why can't it be done in ACT.

 

It seems to me that Sage is only interested in adding fixes( sorry these are upgrades $$$) that they can link to 3rd (Sift/Hoovers) parties and generate additional revenue.

 

This may be counterintuitive, if basic functionality sucks,why would I subscribe to these 3rd parties.

If functionality of program improved, I would more likely look at using swift/Hoovers. Or buying upgrades!

 

I don't buy arguments, that it can't be done. Look at the number of add-on's that improve functionality.

 

I could by some of these addons, but if I am going to spend $500 (Act + addon's) maybe I should be looking at Dynamic or .....

 

Please bring back Goldmine Smiley Frustrated

by jpenney
‎10-16-2012 08:30 PM - edited ‎10-16-2012 08:34 PM

Hoovers is useless for ACT! Users outside CONUS and just adds a further bloat into the system.

Get back to basics and if these  "ADD-INs" can be justified, then let users purchase them by an opt in or out when installing the software to reduce the bloat -  while Sage concentrate on making the Database functional and with capabilities more attuned to the majority of Users 

Labels