Henry,
HMah wrote:
> I’ve seen and used NV2 and though impressed, still prefer NV1.
> I cannot get NV2 to provide the ease of use, flexibility of setup, the ability to make changes to a set of books, speed of data entry and error free processing of NV1.
The program speed, will arrive – but “ease of use”? The NV1 patterns are so ingrained – they will be difficult to change. Hence the need for an NV1 Shell to wrap around the NV2 program – and for me, this is a KEY Selling point to converting any prior users.
> I know they have listened to my concerns but they say the
> improvements will be incorporated into NV2 (but at this time no
> major changes to NV1).
>
> I’m missing the logic because they already have a great product
> and super staff. I’m sure that if they allocated 2-3 months
> they could take NV1 from great to just about unbeatable (which
> I believe it is already but does need some improvements).
Missing Logic? Well, there are a few other problems – which perhaps nobody else knows about except QW Page. NV1 is written in modified assembler. And the main reason its very fast. However, I do not think there is anyone remaining on staff, who can still write in this language – NOT a minor problem!
And for ideal logic, what does it take to figure out a multi-user NV1 – would quell everybody’s clambering for the new product. So my question would be, “Why does this simple logic escape the thinkers – at QW Page?”
When a tree falls in the forest and nobody to listen – does it make a noise?
> With the exception of payroll updates I have not seen any
> improvements to NV1 since Prod 6 was released, was that 1987 or 1998?
Well, what if I told you that a “semi-automatic” multi-user version of NV1 is just around the corner (to be released by me, of course). Would you try it, use it? promote it? Needless to say – it will/does require NV1.
David
Post Edited (06-16-04 16:55)
