We make exensive use of comments in Customers, Vendors, Items, Purchase Orders, Purchase Order Lines, Sales Orders, Sales Order Lines, Bill of Ladings, etc. , etc.
We really need a comments editor that formats comments. These comments print on documents and are just plain ugly and unprofessional looking. A comments editor should include spell checking, bullets, word wrap, etc. Nothing as sophisticated as Word, but a step above notepad.
Suggested by – New – 2
Category:We would love to be able to sync Chart of Accounts, Vendors, and Customers between multiple Business Central companies. This way, when a new account is added/edited, it will automatically be added/changed in different companies.
When running a report, a user can choose a filter for the pre-defined fields or replace an existing filter field with a new one, but a user can't add additional filter fields.
For example, the Inventory Valuation report offers three field to filter on. Let's say the user makes use of these three fields but requires now a fourth field to filter on. This is currently not possible.
Since the only development and deployment method currently supports is Extension Development via a Sandbox using VS Code (AL Lang), isn't it great to have Report Extension Development capability too? There's always possible to dev Extensions for Standard Tables, Pages, CUs but why not Reports? Every End-Client requires their very own methods to represent data comes into an ERP. But as ISVs, we are getting answerless when they just simply ask, "can I add our company logo to this standard report?" I mean, it's obvious, practically. Eagerly waiting for this since there's no other way rather than Re-design the entire report just to map Client's small requirements, which is limited in Word/RDLC Custom Layout designer in base Business Central.
(Simple suggestion, isn't it great to have the Core/Base Development ability like in good old days with NAV?)
make a b2b portal for customers to log in to view orders, pay bills, place orders, request quotes, view quotes and on.
I think ecommerce and customer portal is a must to have and must be from the same house (microsoft) in order to work perfectly together with the erp, inventory, finance, etc.
Many cloud erp companies targeting a built in ecommerce. I can list 20 names but it won't be fair to list them here. Microsoft will have to do it now in order to stay ahead and keep his customers ahead of competition! as the future leading us to see more and more end to end solutions.
most of the connectors, integrations and custom work are just slowing down the success of the customer which slow the success of microsoft and their partners. a growing company will always need more services from MS and its partners. Customer portal / ecommerce will have a positive effect on everybody including the partners that will have more implantation packages for the portal or ecommerce as it's the face of the company. respecting the partners that building connectors and ecommerces. but 500$ per month is not a reasonable price for ecommerce in 2018.
When entering a non-existing “Item No.” in the field “No.”, the following message appears:
This item is not registered. To continue, choose one of the following options:
Create a new item card for XXXX.
Select an existing item.
This functionality cannot be enabled/disabled by (de-)selecting the option in the “Sales & Receivables Setup”
We can do it if speak about “Description” via Sales & Receivables Setup \ Create Item from Description but do not have such type of option for “No.”
In some cases functionality has been felt unwanted from the customer perspective..
With a requirement to have automated tests in a separate (dependent) test extension for AppSource extensions, instead of having the test codeunits inside the same extension makes it impossible to do test driven development with Business Central.
The current process of first having to download symbols for the main app each time we go back to edit the tests (plus having to unpublish the test app, before republishing the main app), means that the developer must wait minutes between each red-green-refactor step.
Ideally if we had two (or more) dependent extensions inside the same workspace in Visual Studio Code, then the AL compiler shouldn’t have the depend on the .App symbol files. It should be able to use the actual source files.
Technically this should be possible, as all information is already present inside the VSCode workspace and the App.json files.
If possible then it should also allow us to use Go to Definition to the actual file and rename references across extensions, if they are within the same workspace.
Assuming you want to send out printed hardcopies for an invoice and you setup the number of copies to 5 in the Customer. If you print, you get 5 copies. If you now also want for informational purposes email the invoice as well - you will get a PDF with 5 copies. Which makes no sense for PDF.
If it would be possible to either setup a alternative number of copies or even set a checkmark in the document sending profile to ignore the number of copies for PDF documents, that would save manual work.