 |
|
Topic: Updates - New
|
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 15 2021 at 04:32:04 AM | Seems that there are three main things that just keep coming up on this forum - Knowing which version you have(change log)/ costing methods / Traceability.
Regarless of if support thinks these are bigger, better, mini, maxi or anything else, if these are what the customer needs, surely that should be the real motivation for a business to want to do it.
The version issue seems really simple, the argument not to update unless you have to is just an excuse, just knowing what was in the last update does not make you update, it just gives you the information for you to decide if it's important.
I really can't understand the problem with the "True" stock valuation - it's a fundamental accounting requirement, anyone who says it's not important to them, either keeps no stock, or does not understand the implications. The information MUST already be available within the system. What quantity of each PO makes up the stock left in stock, and what was the PO cost!
The traceability issue also seems quite easy, take a look at Katana, you already have a table of goods received under each GRN, a simple form that allows you to manually allocate GRN quantities to a WO or SO, until the stock from that GRN is gone - Thats it!
It would really be good if support would make a few more comments on this forum to put these things to bed once and for all. | |
| By: Jason | Posted on: Dec 15 2021 at 05:31:58 AM | I think support has tried on a few occasions to put these things to bed by saying it's not part of their MINI mrp ethos. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen them saying that but people just keep going on about it.
I don't know how many people are using mini mrp but it's been available for over 25 years must be many 1000's of users but as we all know we paid once and we just keep using it forever unlike most other software out there where you pay every month just to keep using it. so the 1000's of users isn't a constant revenue stream.
and they're still in business. must be doing something right.
way I see it a very very small proportion of users is making a lot of noise while most people accept there's limitations.. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 15 2021 at 06:06:57 AM | I agree with Jason. We are moving our system in Jan.
MiniMrp is a low cost system with limited features, but we need these features to keep upto date and help expand our business.
Yes the new software is more expensive, but i guess thats the choice you have.
| |
| By: Jason | Posted on: Dec 16 2021 at 03:44:55 AM | I just want to clarify. I'm not complaining about mini mrp. I'm more than happy with it. sure there could be some more features butif they were added then I'd probably want a couple more to compliment those. They have to draw the line somewhere and it's a cost/feature balance.
I bought a subcompact a month ago. the literature had subcompact written on it so I knew it was gonna be small. But could do with a few more features. Maybe I'll email the OEM asking if they can add some more leg room in the back and a bigger trunk. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 16 2021 at 04:26:18 AM | Or just spend the right amount and buy one with more leg room! Which is what i have done.
I was agreeing with you - my point is, you make your own choice of whatg you want to pay and what is important to you - MiniMrp is what it is, great product if it does what you need, but no point keep asking for more here, it's unlikely to happen. | |
| By: SimonQ | Posted on: Jan 6 2022 at 08:12:30 AM | I don't agree with the last comment by Guest. Any product can be improved over time using feedback from customers.
I build an intelligent power distribution unit for use in equipment racks. Some of the best features are ones that have been suggested by customers. Once the new firmware is released, it is made available to all customers at no charge if they think they will find the new feature useful.
Some of the suggestions that have been made for miniMRP I would find beneficial and would improve the software for others IMHO, but I admit I can carry on without them. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Jan 6 2022 at 10:28:34 AM | But if customers suggest improvements (many customers) and the supplier is not able or willing to implement improvements (for whatever reason), no point keep going on and on about it - if the product is not working for you - you have a choice.
Especially if the supplier makes very little comment or gives little feedback to those customers. | |
| By: Jason | Posted on: Jan 12 2022 at 04:51:39 AM | I've been using MiniMRP for many years and I'm more than happy with it. sure there's a couple of things I wish it could do but the added features I'd like are not the same as the things you would like.
As for them commenting. They have commented many many times to the extent that I'm sure they're tired of repeating themselves trying to explain the minimrp 'Ethos'. it's a small, simple program that simply can not (should not) include all the features of a fully loaded MRP package.
If they added "everything" that "everyone" asks for then they would have a large fully loaded mrp package which is not what I want.
Eveyone wants different things and 2 or 3 people making a lot of noise on the forum asking for a specific feature is not "everyone". | |
| By: Support | Posted on: Jan 12 2022 at 05:00:32 AM | Yes. Jason. We have answered these questions many times and explained the reason why we spend a LOT of time making sure MiniMRP repmains MINI.
Do not buy minimrp if you want a fully loaded MRP system. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Jan 13 2022 at 02:05:50 AM | Thank you support for finally making it clear.
It's just a shame that you made it clear previously, then changed your mind - wasting a lot of time for some of us that do require these VERY basic features, like knowing the value of your stock! We have already made the change, but we could have done this months ago had we not been misled.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Jan 13 2022 at 02:09:02 AM | March 21 -
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This is already Work In Progress.
You'll be able to cost assemblies and total inventory value based on the average cost of your OnHand inventory.
There'll be two options, well, three options actually. #1 would be to use the standard, manually inputted, cost. #2 would be to use FIFO/Average and #3 would be to use most recent purchase price.
Sorry. Can't give any time scale on this. During the summer I hope"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way - it's not 2-3 people! | |
| By: Jason | Posted on: Jan 13 2022 at 03:58:14 AM | | Just wanted to clarify. I made the comment about 2-3 users. I'm not one of the minimrp team so I don't really know how many. I'm just a user who is more than happy with minimrp. There's a few features I would want which are not the same as what you or anyone else wants so I accept what the minimrp team have started calling the minimrp 'ethos' (MINI) | |
Reply - add a comment to this topic.
You may enter letters, numbers and standard punctuation only. HTML and other scripts/tags will be rejected.
|
|
|
