Baan is diversing it's client interface.

What Client interface do you use (for yourself and/or within your site) to connect to your BaaN bshell process on the server?Please DO VOTE

OmeLuuk,

You should have enabled the multiple options when creating the poll. I don't if you can still edit the poll - if not can one of the forum moderators do that please. That is because at our site we use three of the interfaces mentioned.

I changed it to a multiple-option poll. Had to use GTM though :D

it was my first poll posting, did not know that that option was there. The 100 % ba scared me too :D, I also use more than one.

Yep, the results will not reflect the daily usage though: I use 98% of the time the ba6.1 and then the remaining with BW-m.
Now, if I choose both, then looks like I use 50% each... Look like there are no perfect pools :D

Well Victor, use GTM too to over ride BaaNBoard logic :D

I have been laughing a while when read that GTM comment.

Maybe I'm with some Friday's night beers. Or Not? :D

The problem is that I have voted yet, so Can I change my vote to introduce more options? :D :D

Alejandro,

I deleted your vote as well but no more GTM now! The poll stands as it is!

Pat:
Thank you, I have voted again in this poll with more than one option.

OmeLuuk:
I have voted seriously. Good Poll.
Sometimes things do not work in the same direction depending on the interface used. There are some patches specific for BA interface or for BW, etc..

So this is another variable when problems comes. Specially depending on BW version used.

There are no version conflicts between different BW's or different BA's, always use the latest version :D

I did however find a problem with the gui. It was solved long way back in bw, but still exists in bx. Both are gui, so within programscripts they are handled the same. In the standard program however they are absolutely different. But as the poll stands now: the bx interface is hardly used.

The perfect poll: it would be uploading your VST info and more, because client information is not included. Might be an idea for Patrick - to have a more clear view on his public for reasons of fund raising. ( I do not mean this serious:rolleyes: )

About the 50% each: I only could use 10 posibilities. Otherwise I would have made it 2D - first and second choice. I assume most of the developers use ASCII for building and Gui just for testing. However, for me the use of gvim.exe (Graphical VI Improved with code highlighting for BaanTools, http://www.vim.org) made the difference: at that time I switched to the desktop interface. But that was in the past.

Polls like these do tend to age. A similar poll had been done in the past. But as time passes, a shift will be seen towards bw for reasons of MS taking over the world and ERP eliminiating ba.

Mmm, here's an idea for discussion: I wonder how hard it would be write an open-source terminal-based client for BaanERP?

There is a ba6.2. Just login as root and start
ba6.2 ttaad4100 (login as root is needed to eliminate the password popup which ba6.2 cannot handle).

Also other pure asci based sessions do run.

I am afraid the option -- -set GUI=ASCII is not sufficient to run all in ASCII.

Lucas,

I know about the ba6.2 and have used it before for GTM reasons. I really meant a full client like it's older relative 'ba6.1'.

Thanks for the tips anyway. I am sure they will be new to some poeple! :)

Although it kinda feels like building an Atari simulator so you can play the original break-out on your 100Mhz machine.

Mind you, with Triton 2.nothing on my resume, I share your melancholic remeniscense of days past, but would it really be an asset to the BaanERP community?

Rebuilding ba6.1 for Baan ERP would require knowledge of the complete Baan protocol. I don't see a proper way to reverse engineer that part, but maybe a touch of 'hack-in-the-box' would go a long way.

However, if we do manage to obtain this info (come to think of it, maybe Baan will give it to us if we ask real nice), then why build ba6.2??

Doesn't bshell6.2 leave anything left to desire?

That is true, We obvious do not want to loose Microsoft Products On The DeskTop either...

Still wondering when Baan will come with an All Linux version for Client and Server.

Originally posted by OmeLuuk
That is true, We obvious do not want to loose Microsoft Products On The DeskTop either...

That depends on who you're asking. ;)

But yea, there's been enough talk about it. How about a Linux client? Or a palm one? Or a full web based one?

I've been giving some thought to the question I raised earlier and I think that my definition of the ideal BW would be totaly different from it's current format (of course going from an admininstrator's perspective).

Maybe food for an interesting discussion, so let me kick it off...

1. My ideal client would have a fixed menu structure (so it doesn't take 5 minutes to search for a session). Custom sessions need to be added on the client, rather than on the server.
2. All objects in the client would be modifyable by accessing their properties directly.
3. It would allow me to jump between companies and VRC's without hassle (there's a challenge).
4. It would give me more (well, any) system administration options.

There, just a couple off the cuff. Who's next?

Originally posted by Francesco
Although it kinda feels like building an Atari simulator so you can play the original break-out on your 100Mhz machine.

Mind you, with Triton 2.nothing on my resume, I share your melancholic remeniscense of days past, but would it really be an asset to the BaanERP community?


I think it would still have its value because simple data entry remains faster in a ba client than in bw client. I know customers who deliberately put some of their personnel on a ba terminal simply for this purpose.

Did you see the WorkTop interface? I do like it (not that I do use it, I need to do too many things without baan and a terminal window is quite often all I need).

The client option I would like too is able to connect to many different systems at the same time: different versions (2.2 :) upto 51a). So single client, multi server.

Central point of administration, distributed setup would have my preference over client side customization. As a system administrator you know what is made available. And if a client crashes, you won't loose time on customization on the new client.

And indeed Pat, it would need the option to use character based sessions for the sake of speed in data entry.

I have seen nor heard about worktop (did I miss something again?).
I just saw the ppt presentation for webtop that was left on this board and that looked absolutely delightful.

Of course software presentations always look good, it is the pudding and proof thing that sometimes falls behind on them ;)

Worktop is a shell over bw.For customers having BaanERP 5.0c (Tools tt7.1x) [and a BaanIV with correct SP level] there is also the possibility
to use WorkTop instead of BW.
Worktop supports Central Deployment. If you use Worktop this way, this offers a
lot of advantages, mainly for system administrators who now only have to
install, configure, and maintain one system instead of all end-user machines.

Generally, the advantages are:

* No client-side installation or automatic installation and update.
* Global access (only if Windows NT/2000 is used with roaming Profiles).
* The administrator can create Worktop document templates, and the end user
does not have to configure anything.
* Although personalization is supported, end users cannot change
configurations reserved by the administrator.

For more information about WorkTop refer to solution 13964.
ftp://ftp.support.baan.com/updates/port/Worktop/Worktop22_doc.exe (size: 1.4 Mb) and ftp://ftp.support.baan.com/updates/port/Worktop/worktop2_2_18.exe (size: 5.94 Mb)

--- looks as if I am talking to myself here ---

Hi Francesco,

I think Worktop might address a couple of your wishes. Using Worktop the menu structure is cached on the client, making a find very fast when the cache is filled. It won't take minutes, but about a second to find a session.
It also integrates both the menu browser and desktop manager. So you will be able to create your own (fixed) menu just by dragging sessions onto the shortcutbar. You can also create the session shortcut from the find results, from the Run Program dialog (so from the session code), etc. etc. You can organize the shortcuts into groups, rename them and give each of them their own icon.
Worktop also supports central deployment. This means not only that client side installation is not required anymore, but also that no client-side configuration or maintenance is required.
All server configurations, like host, BSE, bshell name, etc., can be maintained centrally. The admin will have options like broadcast messages and sending shortcuts to the Worktop users.

Regards, Ivo

Well looking at the other side it does have a few disadvantages...

1. You can no longer use the Run Session option to start menus.

2. the endusers have to refresh the worktop whenever there is a change in the menu, after a software migration. After every code migrations, we send out a notification message to the end user to do this.

3. the change company option is still an issue wrt the role authorization template. If you give no authorization to the change company session, ttdsk2004m000, and a user chooses that option, the company is set to 000 instead of the original company and the user cannot switch back to his company. He has to logout and logback in. I have a case logged in this issue and I guess I would be getting the solution soon.

4. can use only 1 connection to an environment.

5. even if you use 2 different bwc, worktop wtc documents with the same login to the same environment when you close, one of the instance, all the sessions and the instances are killed [I guess this does a mass kill based on the user id with the GA worktop. The LA worktop used to kill all the sessions based on the current connection and process list].

6. the maintanence is an issue, if you remove or rename any bwc files the wtd is kind of hard coded and cannot be repointed to a new bwc file.

7. if your role authorizations for the end users is not properly set, and they have some shortcuts available, they can get into those sessions and mess up :mad:

8. the LA worktop expects $BSE/tools permissions to be 777 mode (on Unix) so that the users can login into the environment. This has been fixed in the GA worktop, to allow 755 mode.

9. Central deployment seems to be a good idea, but if your end users are over a narrow bandwidth of network connection then its painful procedure. We found its easy to send out a CD with installation files of BW, DFE, EME, DEM, Worktop.

Other advantages -

1. the short cuts can be imported/exported.

2. an browser interface.

More issues to explore -

I didnt test the page mode and the non-interactive mode yet.

Hi N. Prashanth Rao,

Ok, fare enough, see my comments below;

-1- You're right. However, i doubt that many end-users would use this. Worktop is designed to offer an improved interface for the end-user, not for a developer. Although developers might want to run menu's, end-users generally don't.

-2- You're right again, but again i doubt whether this would occur very often in practice. Besides, if the package combination is changed, using the latest 2.2.19 the menu will be refreshed automatically.

-3- I don't understand exactly what you mean, can you provide more details?

-4- This is indeed a known problem and is the direct consequence of using COM as interface between Worktop and BW. COM doesn't allow to run multiple instances of one and the same COM object. We're planning to remove the COM interface and to make the BW code part of Worktop in the next version. This would solve the problem.

-5- Is the same as 4

-6- Since a Worktop document points to a BWC file, of course it becomes invalid when you remove the BWC file. You can however edit the Worktop document manually (it's just plain text) to point to another BWC file.
Renaming the BWC file doesn't mix up the document. It did in earlier Worktop versions, but not in 2.2.18 and later.

-7- Yes, but they can do the same just by running the session code from the run program dialog. So this doesn't open any additonal door to bypass the authorization. And if the Run Program dialog is disabled, Worktop won't allow users to run sessions from shortcuts that are not in the menu.

-8- There is no LA Worktop and has never been. Which version do you refer to as LA?

-9- That's correct. Therefore we did develop Webtop. For low-bandwidth networks, Webtop is the preferred solution.

Thanks very much for your post. This really helps us considering what should be improved in the next version!

regards, Ivo

I think that worktop is the best UI available for Baan. It keeps history of all the sessions you have been, you are able to keep notes in every individual session, you can make your own personalized shortcuts, and of course nice GUI.

I have installed worktop yo my users, and they LOVE IT!

Thanks for the clarification Ivo

Both tops sound like a major improvement to Baan's client side. I would love an opportunity to mess around with them, but being on 5b, I am afraid that might be a while.

From what we discussed earlier, it appears to me that maybe the ideal situation would be to have several clients to chose from.

- an administrative client
This client would offer great flexibility and 'special' features.
- a desktop client
This client would offer ease of use, friendly interface, centralized maintenance and secured features. System and OS independent.
- a data-entry client
Built for speed, not comfort. The fastest possible connection into a (single?) session in Baan.
- a web client

It looks like Baan is taking this multi-client direction from the web/worktop approach. Good job, but don't forget that first one on the list ;)

Hi Ivo,

Sorry I am not criticising the worktop it is surely a good product. But I wanted to share our experiences (good or bad) with the audience here. This helps in understanding the transition between the various BaaN ERP versions.

I do understand your point of view and I worked in BaaN for
3-1/2 years.


For the issue - 2 - I am surprised that I didnt get the information/notes that it does an automatic refresh. I got that version for another case I logged [Case 955521-Option to Find Worktop Version] - Worktop Version: 2.2.19


For the issue - 3 - Please refer to the case info at the BaaN Support site.
Case 941915 - Default company is changed by Baan.


For the issue - 8 - Please refer to the case info at the BaaN Support site.
Case 932203 - Tools Permissions - This was a serious security issue at one time. Its good to see its fixed now.
SOLUTION DESCRIPTION:
Read only permissions for group 'bsp' can now be set for ostpstandard and ostpstdlib when using Worktop 2.2.14 with BW client 7.3a.132.


We are the BaaN-5.2 (Reger as you call it internally) customers. So we been in synch with the Reger development, working with BaaN with all those tools shuttle installations, bugs, new features and trasition from the traditional menu browser to the worktop etc.

I forgot one more issue -

Case 951037
Cannot start newly installed Worktop for users without NT User Local Admin perm on Windows'2000 workstations.


Worktop and Webtop are promising and I look forward to seeing more new stuff from BaaN... Good work... :p

Hi N. Prashanth Rao,

Regarding issue 2; i'm sorry. We planned to deliver this with 2.2.19. At the time i posted the reaction we still planned to do so but since 2.2.19 had to come out quickly due to an important bugfix on BaanIV, it didn't make it. Will be there in 2.2.20.

Issue 3 you mention is already solved. For fixing it the latest version of ottdllreadmenu has to be installed (14, you can read this version number in the File->Properties dialog of Worktop). But i'm surprised this case is still open...

I did also respond to case 951037 but i guess it didn't reach you yet. This was my response;


"In this case Worktop is locally installed. When Worktop is locally installed, Worktop assumes that the user has local admin permission and will try to register the BWC file into the systems registry. If this does not succeed, no connection can be made with the Baan server and neither menu's can be expanded nor sessions can be opened. There are two possible solutions:

-1- Since the user is no local admin, an administrator obviously installed Worktop (since the user can't). Besides installation, the administrator should also create the BWC file and Worktop document. This will register the bwc file used onto the client machine. Now when the user logs in, he will be able to use the document but not to create and use new Worktop documents him\herself.

-2- Use central deployment. In case end-users are not local admin, it's better to use central deployment, specifically designed for users with low access rights. In this case just install a Worktop server, enable the document (from the Administartor menu; Setup Central Deployment) and send the shortcut to the end-users. In central deployment mode, Worktop does not require registry access. Note that central deployment of course also decreases maintenance costs..."


Anyway, i think it is important to differentiate bugs and missing features. If due to a bug a feature doesn't work, i wouldn't consider it a missing feature since it can be solved in the next patch instead of the next major release...

But of course i would like to know about any feature that a customer is really missing. So if you have anything left... don't hesitate to tell me.

Regards, Ivo