Interested in creating and selling training? You pick the price, 50/50 revenue share, and you own the content. Find out more at
Hello all,
I work for company who wishes to iuse Microsoft Dynamics NAV. I am a complete beginner to this product so if anyone could provide me with links to information about this product please do.
The question I am asking is : Do you have to get Microsoft Dynamics NAV through a Microsoft Certified Partner (ISV). Is it possible to buy directly off microsoft and do the installation yourself?
Does anyone know of any ISV's that will provide a company with a ''Developer Edition'' ?
Or Maybe an assisted implementation of the Microsoft Dynamics NAV?
Regards,
Padraic Hickey
You really need to decide what you mean by developer license, there are several levels of developeing for an end user company, You can do quite a bit with just the forms, tables, and report designer, It is a good way to get started, the one thing you can not do is access codueunits and cal code in forms or tables, so you are limited on new functionality you can create, (which for a new user, is probably a good thing), but you can still do a lot, and you can use cal code in reports which combined with processing only feature of reports lets you accomplish a lot. Once you past that point and need more development tools you can add the application builder granule, which gets you access to cal code in forms, tables, and codeunits, it only restricts against some protected tables, which very few people should access anyways. It cost $8000 in the U.S., if you find you need the full developer license as described below you can purchase that for another $26000 in the U.S. You must already have the application designer granule.
Application Builder (7,200)
Platform
You use this granule to change the business rules and special calculations that work behind the scenes.
These business rules and special calculations are defined in a language we call C/AL (C/SIDE Application Language). While Application Builder includes access to C/AL, it does not allow access to existing C/AL code that updates write-protected tables (postings for instance). Application Builder lets you create entirely new areas of functionality for your application, enabling you to tailor Navision to fit your entire organization.
This tool also enables you to create 100 Codeunit objects (numbered from 50,000 to 50,099).
The Application Builder granule enables you to take advantage of the functionality included for developers in the Navigation Pane Designer. This means, for example, that you can create new menu items.
Requirements: Report & Dataport Designer, Form Designer, Table Designer and XML Port Designer
Solution Developer (7,300)
You use this granule for the same purposes as the Application Builder granule, but it also gives you access to code that updates write-protected tables.
This granule gives you the access necessary to change or create any object type, and gives you access to the Merge Tool and Upgrade Tool.
This granule also enables you to use the menu options Translate/Export and Translate/Import in the Object Designer. These options are not available with the Application Builder granule.
Requirements: Application Builder
colingbradley:As David says, the customer really needs the input from the freelancer (who has to be competent to earn a living) to protect themselves from poor development or implementations.I do the same thing as many freelance consultants and make written suggestions to the client that they can then pass on to the NSC, I try and make the descriptions and words look more like the end-user so the NSC does not get upset.(Does not always work).
Not sure I agree with you there. The BSC (ISEB, SIGIST), ISTQB and ISO clearly state that the 2nd most common failing in any software development is caused by the Documentation and Specification.
To try and dumb down what you are trying to tell an NSC is a waste of time and money. I would rather communicate with an experienced consultant on a customer site on a technical level than have them try to make it look like it was written by an end user. If you can communicate on the same level it makes the whole process more effective.
I'm sure your customers employ you for your vast experience in Navision for precisely that reason. What’s the point in employing you to write a requirement the same way an end user would? Why not just do it themselves?
I've come across freelance consultants that know nothing about what they say they do. Now that’s annoying!
colingbradley: The get me in on a regular basis to sort thngs out even though I am prohibited to change any of the code.Tricky situation. In this case I know that the developer employed by the NSC has done some very poor work. I can only suggest how things can be improved.The alternative is to suggest they use another NSC but that is fairly obvious. The client feels locked in so this is their only way to help them feel in control.
I love it when I hear this. The developer has done some very poor code. Are you sure the requirement was not inaccurate, or poor in the first place, or the project was not well managed. Easy to point the finger at someone! I annoy consultants by doing EXACTLY to the letter what they ask for. No more, no less. It’s amazing how often they "Assumed" you would just do some extra, or you would "know" that they wanted that bit changed as well.
A software development will only ever be as good as the specification.
Once you know how to code Navision, its basically paint by numbers, as long as the requirement is correct and designed correctly, its hard to go wrong.
I never hear anyone say, their consultant was slack, or couldn't design a spec to save their lives. It seems to always be the developer that takes the hit! A pet grievance of mine.
TonyH: I love it when I hear this. The developer has done some very poor code. Are you sure the requirement was not inaccurate, or poor in the first place, or the project was not well managed. Easy to point the finger at someone! I annoy consultants by doing EXACTLY to the letter what they ask for. No more, no less. It’s amazing how often they "Assumed" you would just do some extra, or you would "know" that they wanted that bit changed as well. A software development will only ever be as good as the specification. Once you know how to code Navision, its basically paint by numbers, as long as the requirement is correct and designed correctly, its hard to go wrong. I never hear anyone say, their consultant was slack, or couldn't design a spec to save their lives. It seems to always be the developer that takes the hit! A pet grievance of mine.
we get back the new objects and start to test it out, and now the department and location codes don't get carried over to the po, we point this out to the developer, who points to the spec request and says we didn't ask to keep those fields, We have to pay to add them back.
Now we have to say, all existing standard Navision behaivor should remain, and we would also like field xyz in table 123 to post to field xxx in table 167 . so, we are expect to know everything that happens in Navision without being developers, because if we are not, then we can't do a proper spec sheet to your guidelines.
themave: I love when I hear this, the spec was wrong, never the developer, We rely on our developer to have a little common since. But we have been burned on that a few time, for instance we had a change with the requsition carry out action message, Now normal Navision carries over things like department code and location code to the PO that is created, we wanted some additional info also carry over to the PO, so our spec said, please have the following field carry over to the purchase order when the carry out action message is done
I'm not sure I said developers are never wrong David, I think you must have assumed that???
I haven't seen your spec, so I really could not comment. But I am sure it is a little 50/50 from what you've said. Without viewing it I could not say.
TonyH: I'm not sure I said developers are never wrong David, I think you must have assumed that???
TonyH: I haven't seen your spec, so I really could not comment. But I am sure it is a little 50/50 from what you've said. Without viewing it I could not say.
My experience is a little jaded, so forgive the pessimism, We started with Navision in 1999, and our developer was really good, came out and met with us on a regular basis, did good work, then they opened a new office in another state, trying to expand, it went bust and ever since then everything is about billable hours. I get billed 1/4 hour just to send an email with a change order request, then they bill for the time it takes to write a quote, and another 1/4 hour to email it back. then I decide if I want the work done. and it is kind of irritating to hear, you didn't say you wanted the department code to still post, when that was standard functionality to start with.
Billing is always a killer. Until I worked in the US I had never seen this base pay plus bonus per month on hours you bill.
I'd always worked on you get XXX per annum and that’s it, and I found that worked fine. I worked over time but knew I was not getting paid. When it comes to this "Bonus per billable hours" lark you end up with people trying to sneak hours in here and there.
I don't like it. It does not promote team work, as people don't want to help another colleague if they are not going to get paid for it. And it also means people try and sneak more hours in the quote or even worse, for sending an email.
I can see the pro's to it though, try to encourage more work, and also it makes the "person" more active in the working. I'm just not an advocate of it. I just work with it when I have too.
We're way off topic now But its rolled this way. And I totally agree with you!
As for the specification, I've seen it the other way. I've assumed the customer has wanted something (like Standard functionailty + Bespoke) they get the development. See the "extra" (Standard) stuff. They don't want to pay 3 hours of the bill because they did not ask for it.
I think Denstars right, communication, communication, communication.
phenomenon:not only communication but communication with understanding and respect. and with cause, ofcourse :)
developer License for end user, 1 license is it for each database? or for 1 server?