alterEGO
-
Posts
10,235 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
51
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by alterEGO
-
-
1 hour ago, PeterJames said:
1. Every fault and service is recorded at asset level, so you can easily see the history of that item.
I think its down to how often you need to analyse the assets. There are plenty of ways to find this information in the unlikely event that you need it. The PO's in cash can be searched.
2. If faulty engineer can mark as such, system can suggest suitable replacement. Job goes back to the office with replacement part linked and can be invoiced or quoted. Asset is updated showing part swapped.
Our engineers carry van stock of most common parts, we dont lhave the time to feck around diagnosing faults on one visit to return with parts on a second visit. Its much more efficient to fix things in one visit. if we suspect its a part that the engineer does not carry in his van stock we will do our best to arrange its done after collecting said part from us first.
3. Firmware issues, you can search your entire client estate for any that are vulnerable.
How often you have firmware issues that are not found on installation or that cannot be done remotely? I know we have about 400 CCTV systems that we can remotely update if necasary, but I would bet good money that there are not more than three sites with the same firmware on their cameras as the next.
Controlling stock is one thing, I see very little benefit to a live asset list.
We only give 12 months warranty despite what the manufacturers give. If it goes wrong three years after its installed we wont be going back for free. We may get a free replacement back from the manufacturer but it is unlikely to be the same camera.
We have very few comprehensive contracts, but the principle is the same, in fact it cost more to send an engineer twice than it does to supply a replacement camera FOC in most cases.
Hence my reply I get it, but I am not sure that anyone who has it does.
That’s how we used to work, and the model we have been moving away from. It’s fine, and I’m sure you can provide a good service as we have for a long time.
We are now trying to change to a platform based model, for which asset data is invaluable to us, maybe you don’t need it.
-
5 hours ago, PeterJames said:
Hmm I get it but I am not sure that you do
Well, with a useful reply like that……….
-
On 12/02/2022 at 10:49, PeterJames said:
To what purpose?
1. Every fault and service is recorded at asset level, so you can easily see the history of that item.
2. If faulty engineer can mark as such, system can suggest suitable replacement. Job goes back to the office with replacement part linked and can be invoiced or quoted. Asset is updated showing part swapped.
3. Firmware issues, you can search your entire client estate for any that are vulnerable.
loads more but I’m sure you get the gist
-
14 hours ago, PeterJames said:
I think nobody seems to think of the bigger picture here. The more I think about it, holding old product numbers in your products area of your database is just another form of hoarding in a paperless way. Maybe I am wrong, but if I need to know when we installed, I can see that on the front page of the customers database. If I need to know what we installed I can look at the spec in the cabinet on the customers database. for warranty I can see it on the PO. I am sure that newsagents didnt keep Marathons on their purchasing list when mars changed the name to Snickers, chocolate bars are only superseded once in a blue moon cameras are changing every other week.
It sounds to me like you aren’t working to an asset level, maybe that’s the difference here.
Assets for us are a live item, but they start as a product on a quotation.
-
22 hours ago, PeterJames said:
I am not saying that the part number is deleted from all existence once I decide to stop using it, and it wont be because the original part no's will be saved to the original quotes and the original purchase order. In fact the PO is the most important thing to be saved as this tells me exactly what was ordered for the job. Therefore in the unlikely event of a warranty claim I have a record of what it is where it was purchased, and when, on the customers database.
The irony of it all is that if an engineer changes a camera under warranty, he will not likely have the same camera onboard (most likely a later camera) when we send the faulty cam back we will most likely get a later model in return.
How often do I check: Everytime I do a CCTV quote I compare the suppliers quote to my excel sheet
What I do not need is superseded part numbers in my products database, as this means I have to trawl through 20/30 different products to find the current one.
I dont need 20 different 5mp cameras when I am currently only using vfocal or fixed lense bullet or turret, white or grey.
We only use 4 different detectors for precisely that reason quad, rfquad, dtG3, rfDT,
We used to be similar in this regard, but we have a much wider portfolio of products these days. I used to be against it but once we moved into the enterprise/global client market you don’t get as much control. We are still relatively restricted on the core systems, but not everyone wants the same cameras on the end of the VMS.
-
35 minutes ago, PeterJames said:
Surely thats in your customers database? We do the quote in Cash this then makes up a excel sheet with all the product numbers part no's of the time of installation. this is also linked to the PO all saved in the customers database. If the quote is accepted the database is live. It was the same with Fmaker, the part numbers at the time are saved on the customers quote. What I dont need is superseded parts in my products list, especially the speed that the CCTV industry is changing, I want to be able to get my quotes out the door quickly and efficiently and most importantly using the latest products, and not accidently quoting something obsolete.
I agree it’s a headache finding parts on quote building, but there is live info you may want to record against the part. All systems work differently though, so tbh I’m probably talking out of turn without knowing how Cash works in that regard.
-
On 30/01/2022 at 11:35, PeterJames said:
TBF I have used all three of the main contenders now all be it I used the dos version of (I cant remember its name)
I also used Kiss for windows which looking back I think was probably quite good but the administrator I had at the time was not so good. I am very used to AM, and that makes it that much harder as CFW is quite a bt different. You can open as many windows as you like, have several customer data bases open at once, which is handy as it means you dont have to close what you're doing to look at another customers folder or sales enquiry ect. The same with the diary you can have several instances of the diary open or customers open or sales enquiry open. At first I found this annoying clicking on minimised tiles only to find it wasnt what I wanted, but as long as you close the folder when you are finished its not so bad. It is very quirky and I am managing to get used to the quirkyness.
Probably my only moan is I said at the very beginning that I didn't want every model camera in the products, with Filemaker I used to update a camera when it was superseded as models change weekly. Cash said that I should just add more models and I was out voted by admin, but as I predicted when writing a quote now I have hundreds of cameras to hunt through most which are obsolete, and none have any sort of order to them. All we needed was IP or analogue bullet or dome. The Irony is that Admin have stopped adding cameras to products. CASH said that it would feck up the PO for returns etc if we dont add the correct model numbers I said we will just have our own product number and change the manufacture part number in products as we stop using it. I may see if I can delete some of the old ones I am not sure if that will have a effect on anything else though
I’m lost with that, we need all the parts so we can track the asset onsite for firmware, warranty and specifications.
-
Lol
-
1
-
-
I think you're getting norm mixed up with Jef.
-
Hah, Not fair on the average working man is it? What would you do?
-
Fill him in.
-
You're **** at this forum admin lark JW.
-
Every public part of the site is viewable and can be posted in.aaron can you tell me which areas it doesnt work in, ive gone through the permissions before but there are a lot of areas to change i could of misssed some
-
So if you are a qualified spark and decide to do something else for a couple of years are you no longer trade?
-
James why don't you fix the 'Trade Only' section that doesn't work on any area of the site instead of enforcing (what is in this case) a pretty and pointless rule.
You want some members not to be able to access public yet the feature has never worked.
Good luck Joe, glad to hear all is going well for you.
-
They always gave us spares in the past.
-
We have spare Dualcom gprs units, are you saying you can't have spare digi airs and just swap the sim and NVM?Indeed, get to site, find out unit is goosed, 60 mile round trip next week. ****.
-
Most firms wouldn't sell monitoring and expect to fit it on the day anyway. Connection forms etc.
-
#stalker
-
Jef, there is no need to try and trip people up, you just end up falling over.
I was just after advice, your AM issues didn't seem that big to me, you said they were a major issue so I questioned why you were happy with that. You then go on to replay that you never said they were major and I am using fixed issues to make your supplier look bad. God knows what you were on about, I'll just asume it was an off day.
I am always happy to work for a common goal, but I will also say when something is just not good enough. On this occasion I never said it wasn't good enough, I said the opposite, that it didn't seem like a major issue.
-
See I agree those are not the end of the world and seem to be quickly fixed.
I just don't want major issues.
No.1 stops you doing an SDP. IMO that's major as it rendered AM unusable for an entire week.
. I don't ever recal saying we had "major issues" never mentioned that issues identified effect what we do just advised not to upgrade as it would prevent others from xyz.
Yeah, I must just be making it up..............
-
Jef, take a Valium mate.
I know you recommended we didn't upgrade, when did I say otherwise? Still doesn't make sense why you didn't notice the SDP/items flaw for weeks, as busy as you are I assumed you would of needed to create at least one SDP.
Not sure what that has to do with anything but we run Windows server 2012, desktops run W7 and latest office.
I assume when I buy product it works, nothing more. Yesterday it was a major issue for you, today it isn't. At least I'm consistent.
-
You could improvise, but that's a fair point. How did you only notice this last week, when you have been on 305 for ages?
How do they overlook stuff like that and why do you take it so well?
-
See I agree those are not the end of the world and seem to be quickly fixed.
I just don't want major issues.
Cash for Windows
in Business Management Software
Posted
I’m not trying to, I was just sharing our current high level plans. I’m not a my way or the highway type these days.