Skip to content

AdminEdward M. Kwang - NETcellent System, Inc. (CEO / Founder, NETcellent Systems, Inc.)

My feedback

59 results found

  1. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    We will do this for Elliott V9

  2. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Elliott Forum  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    We have no plan to support item cost at the warehouse level. We suggest you to use a different item.

  4. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    We are aware of this might happen. But we are not sure how frequent this issue happen or under exact what condition this will happen. At this moment, we are not aware of a better solution than the current method to delete the orphan user session from PSQL engine.

  8. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Elliott Forum  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    We had reviewed this issue in depth and we can't address this issue in any reasonable manner. Any changes will cause bigger problem in other area. At this moment, we are not going to address this issue. Instead, we are asking you to consider a few things in your procedure: (1) We suggest you not to perform GL interfacing while the posting is taking place. A lot of our users use defer processing at night to perform posting. That would certainly address this issue; (2) When interfacing with G/L , please interface distribution in the past, not the current date; (3) The chances of the out of balance increase because the distribution file is not purged and cause the interface take forever to complete which increase the chances of conflict. Therefore, we recommend you to purge your old distribution records to speed up your interface.

  10. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    Expanding of the AP invoice number came up many times before. In our next major version, we plan to expand the AP invoice number from 8 digits to 12 digits. We do understand that there are certain vendors (especially, trucking companies) will send you invoices over 12 digits. On the other hand, if we expand the maximum invoice number field to something like 25 digits, then it will cause difficult with displaying it on the screen because there are only so much real estate space. The common strategy to deal with this type of long invoice number problem is to use AP Voucher Reference. Enter the long invoice number on AP Voucher Reference. Then you should also go to Global Setup -> Acct -> AP Global Control. Turn on the following flag: "1. Print Voucher Reference On A/P Check?"

  11. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    Dan, in the original modules design, IM (Inventory Management) is a lower layer module than PO (Purchase Order). That is, you could have IM module, without PO module. But not vice versa.

    Even though most of the user perform Landed Cost calculation through PO module, but user could perform do that base on the receiving transaction in IM Inventory Transaction Processing as well. Therefore, placing the report under the IM module making more sense than PO module. Just FYI

  12. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    Dan, I like your idea. This is probably something we should look at in Elliott V9.

  13. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    There are two concerns with implementing this feature: (1) This particular feature is complicated. Especially the logic to ensure good performance now we are printing against the invoice history database; (2) The coding with DYO is difficult to maintain.

    We are considering moving away from DYO. We can't be sure if we are going to create something new to replace DYO in Elliott V9 or continue to support it. If you can implement your invoice form with standard Elliott form, we would encourage you to do so.

  14. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Elliott Forum  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Elliott Forum  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    Did you try the function at PO -> Processing -> Purge Closed Purchase Order?

  18. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment

    Can you be more specifically indicate which web services, method, and how you want the return structure be modified?

    Please be aware of that changes like this usually can't be achieved easily because if we modify the return structure, then we are breaking the contract between the code and web services. Therefore, instead of modifying the existing web services, we often introduce a new web services. That of course, make this process a lot more complicated than a simple change.

1 3 Next →

Feedback and Knowledge Base