CAD Managers
Where did Microsoft CRM not meet your expectations?
Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
<%= Clinton Gallagher
"Mike Donahue" wrote in message
news:8DE5C66B034C66883AC46EB0C8D8734A@in.WebX.maYI
>
> "clintonG" wrote in message
> news:002A39C5093205E7864109A8A2F01321@in.WebX.maYI
> > Microsoft has changed its policy about who can and who can not
> > sell Microsoft CRM so that issue is no longer relevant.
> >
> > People need to know that the Microsoft Partner Program is being
> > re-engineered at this very point in time. Unlike the CPAs who entered
> > the IT services markets through the backdoor partners will now have
> > to establish and maintain their credibility on the basis of merit and
will
> > also be publically rated by customer feedback to mention but one
> > of many ranking criteria. Change is underway.
> >
> > The left hand/right hand stuff in the product lines are due to the fact
> that
> > the financial and business management applications were acquisitions
that
> > are still being re-engineered themselves. They are quite good now and
are
> > only going to get better.
> >
> > Yes, I agree, the newsgroups are a good source to interact with others
> > and is a great source to compare notes and contrast opinions.
> >
> > -
> > <%= Clinton Gallagher
> > A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
> > Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
> > NET csgallagher@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com
> > URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/
> >
> >
>
> Well, all that said, I'm about as big a Microsoft whore as you'll find,
and
> I still couldn't recommend the product. IMHO, the pain you'd go through
> growing along with the product doesnt outweigh the pluses of the software.
> There's too many other mature CRM offerings out there. Will it be a great
> product? Probably. Is it right now? I don't think so.
>
> My 2 cents, take them for what they're worth.
>
> Mike
>
>
Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
<%= Clinton Gallagher
"Mike Donahue"
news:8DE5C66B034C66883AC46EB0C8D8734A@in.WebX.maYI
>
> "clintonG"
> news:002A39C5093205E7864109A8A2F01321@in.WebX.maYI
> > Microsoft has changed its policy about who can and who can not
> > sell Microsoft CRM so that issue is no longer relevant.
> >
> > People need to know that the Microsoft Partner Program is being
> > re-engineered at this very point in time. Unlike the CPAs who entered
> > the IT services markets through the backdoor partners will now have
> > to establish and maintain their credibility on the basis of merit and
will
> > also be publically rated by customer feedback to mention but one
> > of many ranking criteria. Change is underway.
> >
> > The left hand/right hand stuff in the product lines are due to the fact
> that
> > the financial and business management applications were acquisitions
that
> > are still being re-engineered themselves. They are quite good now and
are
> > only going to get better.
> >
> > Yes, I agree, the newsgroups are a good source to interact with others
> > and is a great source to compare notes and contrast opinions.
> >
> > -
> > <%= Clinton Gallagher
> > A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
> > Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
> > NET csgallagher@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com
> > URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/
> >
> >
>
> Well, all that said, I'm about as big a Microsoft whore as you'll find,
and
> I still couldn't recommend the product. IMHO, the pain you'd go through
> growing along with the product doesnt outweigh the pluses of the software.
> There's too many other mature CRM offerings out there. Will it be a great
> product? Probably. Is it right now? I don't think so.
>
> My 2 cents, take them for what they're worth.
>
> Mike
>
>
"clintonG" wrote in message
news
AE7F76BB48FADAB840337CB785B70E0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR
> Where did Microsoft CRM not meet your expectations?
> Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
>
> <%= Clinton Gallagher
>
>
Well, we're heading into a thread more apropos for the ms newsgroup, but:
1. It didnt feel like a "Microsoft" product. It felt like a product
Microsoft had bought (see Frontpage 1.0, aka VandeMeer).
2. Integration with Office should have been seamless; it wasnt.
3. It seemed weak in the area we most needed, Marketing.
4. It didn't allow for many-to-many relationships (although I understand
future versions will).
Again - I'm not knocking the product, per se; it just isn't right for us at
it's current level of maturity. What's listed in 2.0 seems like much more
of a fit.
Re: others, salesforce.com, Saleslogix, etc., etc. There are a lot of
players in the mid-size range, right above the Act/Goldmine crowd.
Just personally, unless a first version of any product from any company has
substantial benefits, I'm inclined to be doubtful about it. Not an anti-MS
thing. I've jumped on the Exchange and Sharepoint bandwagon from their
first versions, but each offered something unique.
Mike
news
AE7F76BB48FADAB840337CB785B70E0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR> Where did Microsoft CRM not meet your expectations?
> Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
>
> <%= Clinton Gallagher
>
>
Well, we're heading into a thread more apropos for the ms newsgroup, but:
1. It didnt feel like a "Microsoft" product. It felt like a product
Microsoft had bought (see Frontpage 1.0, aka VandeMeer).
2. Integration with Office should have been seamless; it wasnt.
3. It seemed weak in the area we most needed, Marketing.
4. It didn't allow for many-to-many relationships (although I understand
future versions will).
Again - I'm not knocking the product, per se; it just isn't right for us at
it's current level of maturity. What's listed in 2.0 seems like much more
of a fit.
Re: others, salesforce.com, Saleslogix, etc., etc. There are a lot of
players in the mid-size range, right above the Act/Goldmine crowd.
Just personally, unless a first version of any product from any company has
substantial benefits, I'm inclined to be doubtful about it. Not an anti-MS
thing. I've jumped on the Exchange and Sharepoint bandwagon from their
first versions, but each offered something unique.
Mike
That would be 'Vermeer' from which FrontPage was derived.
I'm big on SharePoint myself as I'm thorougholy convinced it is well on
its way to become a sweetheart solution for the A/E/C markets.
<%= Clinton Gallagher
"Mike Donahue" wrote in message
news85D033B7EB55F7425816D4A05630BA6@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR
>
> "clintonG" wrote in message
> newsAE7F76BB48FADAB840337CB785B70E0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR
> > Where did Microsoft CRM not meet your expectations?
> > Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
> >
> > <%= Clinton Gallagher
> >
> >
> Well, we're heading into a thread more apropos for the ms newsgroup, but:
>
> 1. It didnt feel like a "Microsoft" product. It felt like a product
> Microsoft had bought (see Frontpage 1.0, aka VandeMeer).
> 2. Integration with Office should have been seamless; it wasnt.
> 3. It seemed weak in the area we most needed, Marketing.
> 4. It didn't allow for many-to-many relationships (although I understand
> future versions will).
>
> Again - I'm not knocking the product, per se; it just isn't right for us
at
> it's current level of maturity. What's listed in 2.0 seems like much more
> of a fit.
>
> Re: others, salesforce.com, Saleslogix, etc., etc. There are a lot of
> players in the mid-size range, right above the Act/Goldmine crowd.
>
> Just personally, unless a first version of any product from any company
has
> substantial benefits, I'm inclined to be doubtful about it. Not an
anti-MS
> thing. I've jumped on the Exchange and Sharepoint bandwagon from their
> first versions, but each offered something unique.
>
> Mike
>
>
I'm big on SharePoint myself as I'm thorougholy convinced it is well on
its way to become a sweetheart solution for the A/E/C markets.
<%= Clinton Gallagher
"Mike Donahue"
news
85D033B7EB55F7425816D4A05630BA6@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR>
> "clintonG"
> news
AE7F76BB48FADAB840337CB785B70E0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaR> > Where did Microsoft CRM not meet your expectations?
> > Which 'mature offerings' would you be referring to?
> >
> > <%= Clinton Gallagher
> >
> >
> Well, we're heading into a thread more apropos for the ms newsgroup, but:
>
> 1. It didnt feel like a "Microsoft" product. It felt like a product
> Microsoft had bought (see Frontpage 1.0, aka VandeMeer).
> 2. Integration with Office should have been seamless; it wasnt.
> 3. It seemed weak in the area we most needed, Marketing.
> 4. It didn't allow for many-to-many relationships (although I understand
> future versions will).
>
> Again - I'm not knocking the product, per se; it just isn't right for us
at
> it's current level of maturity. What's listed in 2.0 seems like much more
> of a fit.
>
> Re: others, salesforce.com, Saleslogix, etc., etc. There are a lot of
> players in the mid-size range, right above the Act/Goldmine crowd.
>
> Just personally, unless a first version of any product from any company
has
> substantial benefits, I'm inclined to be doubtful about it. Not an
anti-MS
> thing. I've jumped on the Exchange and Sharepoint bandwagon from their
> first versions, but each offered something unique.
>
> Mike
>
>
