Is MYOB out of its depth with MYOB Advanced?
I have been using MYOB advanced for over a year now and there are many things that make me wonder if there really is a comprehensive understanding of the Acumatica product at MYOB. It feels like MYOB is a branding company, not a software company, who have put a purple dress on Acumatica and are unable to help it fit into the real world wearing such robes. Could an end user poll be taken, to see if any of us actually cared if you simply dropped the MYOB charade and switched us all over to AcumaticaJames_Brading? Acumatica is really what the product is, putting the MYOB badge on it might have been a marketing coup but it really seems like we are left with a poor second cousin, whereas if we were put back in the fold with other Acumatica users, where the product is properly managed, has the support forums and communitity of developers and users who all work together wouldn't it just be a lot easier and superior for everyone? An example of what i mean... no outlook function, despite it being an acumatica native since 2017: https://community.myob.com/t5/Other-MYOB-software/Myob-Advanced-Outlook-add-on-issues/td-p/480375 Such a poor cousin, we dont even get a seat at the MYOB family table: https://community.myob.com/t5/Other-MYOB-software/Myob-Advanced-support/td-p/478445 https://community.myob.com/t5/Other-MYOB-software/Is-MYOB-Advanced-end-users-feedback-and-challenges-valued/m-p/672942#M14258Solved2FA Signup Errors
Is something wrong with 2FA signup? We have had 2 different clients report the same message when attempting to sign up for 2FA today: We didn't recognise that email or password. Please try again. We tried using the Forgotten your password?to see if an account somehow existed already, but no email came through.Purchase Order Requisitions/Requests
Hi All, I have a couple of questions surrounding POs in MYOB Advanced and the best way to getting a wider workforce at an organisation into a formal purchasing process. Currently the only way to get affordable users into the system for the purpose of raising a PO "Request"is via Employee Users in Enterprise Edition, and then this functionality is very limited, and their are too many steps to push this through to PO. We're really happy with our PO Requisitions Portal for Exo, and have had great support in the community regarding it and positive feedback from clients. They can compare the requisiton against budgets before approving, and have multi-level approvals with attachments etc. We continue to expand its functionality as we have a good userbase already. So my questions are: MYOB, do you have any plans to make "Requisitons" available to employee users and expand out the approval process to help approvers make educated decisions without clicking too many times. Community, has anyone already built a PO approval customisation or app/web interface directly into Advanced? If we hooked up our PO Requisitions Portal to MYOB Advanced, doesthe communityalready have demand for this? We've got some ideas for pricing etc already as we currently have 4 businesses considering it in concept and know they user numbers. Keen to hear your thoughts! SteveCustom selector field working in one tenant, but errors in second tenant
I have a custom field working as expected in Tenant 1, but in other tenants it errors. Publishing was performed using the Publish to Multiple Tenants button. POOrder.CustomField is a selector showing a filtered list of Non-Stock Items belonging to a specific CUSTOMCLASS Item Class. In Tenant 1, where the customisation was published from (to all tenants): The selector correctly displays the list of items in the CUSTOMCLASS Item Class, allows selection in the custom field, and saves the Purchase Order without error. In Tenant 2, the same custom field correctly displays the list of items (different items in this tenant, but still belonging to the matching named CUSTOMCLASS Item Class), allows selection in the custom field, but on save give this error:'CustomField' cannot be found in the system. Here is the DAC Extension: public class POOrderExt : PXCacheExtension<PX.Objects.PO.POOrder> { #region CustomField [PXDBString(50)] [PXUIField(DisplayName="Custom Field")] [PXSelector( typeof(Search<PX.Objects.IN.InventoryItem.inventoryCD , Where<PX.Objects.IN.InventoryItem.itemClassID, Equal<customfieldItemClassIdConstant>>>), typeof(PX.Objects.IN.InventoryItem.inventoryCD), typeof(PX.Objects.IN.InventoryItem.descr), DescriptionField=typeof(PX.Objects.IN.InventoryItem.descr))] public string CustomField { get; set; } public abstract class customField : IBqlField { } public class customfieldItemClassIdConstant : PX.Data.BQL.BqlInt.Constant<customfieldItemClassIdConstant> { public customfieldItemClassIdConstant() : base(FindCustomFieldItemClassID("CUSTOMCLASS")) { } public static int FindCustomFieldItemClassID(string itemClassCD) { PXResult<INItemClass> result = PXSelect<INItemClass, Where<INItemClass.itemClassCD, Equal<Required<INItemClass.itemClassCD>>>> .SelectWindowed(new PXGraph(), 0, 1, itemClassCD); if(result == null) return 0; INItemClass customfieldItemClass = result.GetItem<INItemClass>(); if(customfieldItemClass == null) { return 0; } else { return customfieldItemClass?.ItemClassID ?? 0; } } } #endregion I cant work out why it would work in one tenant, and not the others as the fields and selector is behaving as it should in all tenants, but the save of the selection is erroring, even though the database column is shared by all tenants.SolvedJobAdder integration with MYOB Advanced
Does anyone have experience with JobAdder and integrating with Advanced? A Google search shows the MYOB website as a result, but the first link loads a 404 error page: https://www.myob.com/nz/apps/products/jobadder and the bottom two links load the apps categories, which don't have JobAdder in them. https://www.myob.com/au/apps/category/products?category=advanced-wfm https://www.myob.com/au/apps/category/industries?category=human-resourcesItem Class Parameters on Reports (uses RLike instead of Equal)
I've been recently coming across inventory reports (AR674000 for example) that for some unknown reason, it was decided to use the RLike as the Filter condition, instead of Equal. Can't work out what this would be useful as it only seems to confuse users when they select a single Item Class in the parameter selector, but are returned items from other classes with that value in the id. Anyway, change this to Equal and it will behave logically like the rest of the parameters: