 |
 |
Well, I just had a phone call with someone in MSU Payroll, and that person explained a few things that could make a difference in this discussion: - SAP was designed for *businesses*, *not* universities. - No one else makes a system designed for the practices at universities, so SAP was actually the best of all the admitedly insufficienct alternatives at the time. - The old system not only had its own host of problems (perhaps not within view of many of us, but real just the same), but support for it was ending. So we really had no choice but to take up the best of what was offered and then painfully adapt it to our peculiar needs. No one else explained all this to me before (or they did, and I just wasn't ready to hear it). If this is all so, then I forthwith withdraw my ealier "Here here!" to Rich's suggestion that some people involved in this deserve to be relieved of duty, at least insofar as it might apply to anyone at MSU -- chances are that everyone at MSU made the best decision and investment under the circumstances. Perhaps we are just stuck shoehorning a system designed for businesses into serving our peculiar needs. This might even somewhat soften my stance toward the shortcomings of SAP. For all I know their system is well suited to the practices and loyalties of their desired market, i.e., busineses, and if that is the case then who am I to tell them they need to adapt their product to the vagaries of universities? It still seems to me that their business customers and every one else would benefit by their dropping proprietary standards in favor of common and ongoing standards, but what do I know? -- dkm At 7/7/2011 11:17 AM Thursday, David McFarlane wrote: >Here here! > >-- dkm > > >At 7/6/2011 02:34 PM Wednesday, Richard Wiggins wrote: >>Official Web sites should adhere to Web standards. Specifically, >>in the year 2011, if a content provider claims that the content >>they serve needs to adhere to a browser, such as IE8 instead of >>IE9, that content provider is incompetent. Their content needs to >>adhere to HTML 5. Any such content provider needs to be relieved >>of duty, and their managers and administrators as well. >> >>/rich >> >>On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:18 PM, STeve Andre' >><<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>The 4G requirement is just not correct for XP, since only 3G is usable there. >> >>As for Acrobat, there might be some difference between 10.0, the intermediate >>version and 10.1. A friend found an interesting rendering problem that was >>resolved in the latest version which was in the first 10 version. Maybe this >>is the problem? >> >>Has anyone used Foxit with EBS? >> >>--STeve Andre' >> >> >>On 07/06/11 10:36, Aldrich, Dak wrote: >>Ok. Now this is getting frakking ridiculous. >> >>We had problems about 3 weeks ago and we called the EBS >>helpdesk. We called because it was taking 5 and 8 minutes to get >>any kind of faculty appointment approved in the system. >> >>We were told that users HAD to have the LATEST version of >>Adobe... Correct me if I'm wrong... ISN'T ACROBAT X THE LATEST >>VERSION?... AND they had to have 4 gigs of memory. (Yes, that's >>exactly what I was told. And like a dip, I didn't get a name of >>the agent we spoke to.) >> >>So, what is it? Is Acrobat X the problem? Or is it not? I really >>wish we could get consistent answers between the web site, >>helpdesk, and everyone else that's throwing answers around out there. >> >>My problem right now is that ALL users, except for one, are having >>the same problem. It's taking 5 to 8 minutes to process an >>approval for a faculty appointment. That means nothing to me, but >>the users that do it here say that's unacceptable. Only one >>machine is able to process them in any acceptable amount of time. >> >>All machines have either XP Pro SP3 or Windows 7 SP1, IE 8, Acrobat >>Reader X and SAP. The only two differences between these machines >>are the OS and that some have 2 gigs memory, others have 4 >>gigs. Otherwise, they all have the same version of IE, SAP and Acrobat Reader. >> >>Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. >> >>-dak >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Kim Geiger [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >>Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 4:11 PM >>To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] EBS HR Module, SAP GUI and Adobe Acrobat >> >>On 7/5/2011 at 4:02 PM, Lee >>Duynslager<<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>Hey has anybody else out there had problems with any of the PDF forms >>Used with the SAP GUI in the HR module in EBS, after the latest >>updates to Windows? >> >> >> >> >> >>What did you do to resolve the problems? >> >>You know you can't have Acrobat X installed, right? >> >>-- >>Kim Geiger >>Information Technologist >>Broadcasting Services >>Michigan State University >><tel:517-432-3120%20x%20429>517-432-3120 x 429