Microsoft Cases
Microsoft Cases
Time Sheets In Microsoft Crm For Professional And Consulting Services Notes
In Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4.0 (as well as 3.0) there is natural way to track consulting or field service time logs - in Task, associated with the Case. When you close the case - you will have to specify billable time (and you will see summary time rolled from Tasks for your reference). The best results could be achieved if you setup Contract and Contract Lines (in Contract Line you can specify budget in minutes, obviously not very convenient, but you can easily convert them into hours) and associate the Case (or it could be considered as Work Order) with the Contract Line. In theory it is very elegant solution just out of the box, however it is quite complex for consultant or technician to browse Microsoft CRM user web interface to find the Case, where he or she is supposed to create new task and log time there. We suggest several improvements:
1. Open Task Greed. This is custom Microsoft CRM SDK programmed windows, where you as technician see all your open task and you can create new task on the fly from there, where you will be suggested to pick one of the cases, owned by you or shared with you. This greed should improve your performance dramatically and make it similar to old-good-days online text Unix based applications
2. Management Approvals. You manager sees all your tasks and her or his duties is to review, modify and approve your Timecards. When your time logs are approved by manager - they are ready for export into the text CSV file. At this point - your IT people should be able to integrate your timelog export files into your Accounting Application. It could be Microsoft Dynamics GP (integration via Integration Manager), SAP Business One (via Data Transfer Workbench), QuickBooks, MYOB, PeachTree or any generic Accounting application, supporting text files import into Sales module
3. Openness for further customization. This Microsoft CRM Project Tracking modules is very simple and ready for being tuned for your specific business needs. For example, we can create custom UserId for your numerous technicians, associated with only one MS CRM user - in this case you do not have to purchase thousand of MS CRM user licenses (your technicians do not really need to work in Microsoft CRM, the only duty for them should be logging the time). We have proven codes integrating into Microsoft Dynamics GP via eConnect (which could be set to work in Real Time) or into SAP Business One via SB1 SDK
4. MS CRM Timesheet reporting. Reports are available or could be created or modified in MS CRM SSRS report wizard (and you can further tweak them in Microsoft CRM Visual Studio)
5. Please, call us: 1-866-528-0577, [email protected]
About the Author
Andrew Karasev, Alba Spectrum Group, http://www.albaspectrum.com [email protected] 1-866-528-0577, 1-630-961-5918, serving GP customers USA and Canada Nationwide: California, Minnesota, New York, Quebec, Ontario, Illinois, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Virginia, Florida, new Mexico, Iowa, Indiana, Alaska, Hawaii. Local service is available in Houston/Dallas: Richmond, Rosenberg, Katy, Galveston, Sugar Land; in Chicago: Naperville, Aurora, Plainfield, Romeoville, Batavia, Downers Grove, Schaumburg, Rockford, Elgin, Crystal Lake, Joliet, Hinsdale, Lisle, Montgomery, Oswego
WHY DOES MICROSOFT EVEN PRODUCE THESE FLIMSY A** CASES!?
Alright, im a little mad now. My MW2 disk cracked in the center and i did some tests as to why it would crack. i mean yeah, the spinning + the heat makes it easier, but i dont even play it as much as BC2 and all of my tests point to one thing. THE FLIMSY A** CASE THAT THE CAME CAME IN. when you press the middle and try to take the disk out the case bends the oppisite way as the disk, and that seems to make it crack. i understand that the new cases use less plastic than the old, and sure they cost less to make. but, it ruins disks. So please give me a good reason on why the hell they would give us these cheap, flimsy, defective, sleazy cases?
Because the cases are cheaper, that's why they use them.
Microsoft Cases
Morning Market Snapshot: August 5, 2010: Microsoft Settles Patent Infringement Cases with Salesforce
A Dispute Between Microsoft And An Israeli Distributor Will Be Tried In Court In Ireland
Adv. Omer Wagner, Adv. Gill Nadel
Many times, when a dispute arises between an Israeli party and a foreign party, each of the sides tries to bring the case before the judge in its country. But what happens when each party files an action in the court in its country- can the court in two countries try parallel cases on almost identical topics?
This discussion came up in a recently issued decision of the District Court of Tel Aviv.
The facts of the case and the claims of the parties:
The EIM Technologies Corporation (the corporation) operated for a number of years as a licensed distributor for Microsoft in Ireland, until the conclusion of the relationship between the parties in 2005. Microsoft Ireland filed an action against the corporation to the court in Ireland, for a sum of 2.4 million dollars, claiming breach of the distribution agreements and filing incomplete reports regarding royalties and sales.
In 2006, the corporation filed a counter-suit against Microsoft Ireland and Microsoft Israel in court in Israel for 10 million NIS, claiming the following: loss of profits after the conclusion of the relationship, loss of contact conducted between the parties regarding sale of the corporation to Microsoft and failure to pay money owed to the corporation according to the distribution agreements.
In the current proceeding, Microsoft requested that the action conducted in Israel be erased or frozen, based on the Irish court's determination that the exclusive jurisdiction to hear the case belonged to it, in light of the jurisdiction clause between the parties.
In opposition, the Israeli corporation claimed that even though there was a certain amount of overlap between the action it had filed and the proceedings being conducted in Ireland, they were not completely identical since a large portion of the case in Israel dealt with events that occurred after the conclusion of the distribution agreement (which is not being heard in Ireland), and therefore there is justification to allow the proceedings to continue in Israel as well.
The court's decision:
The court ruled that the two actions (in Ireland and in Israel) are based on the distribution agreement between the parties, and therefore there is considerable overlap between the cases. The court did not attach particular importance to the fact that there are certain differences between the actions, and ruled that the difference arises, naturally, from the fact that one action was filed by Microsoft and the other by the Israeli corporation.
Eventually, the court accepted Microsoft's petition and instructed that the proceedings in the case being heard in Israel be frozen until the court in Ireland decides on the case, but did not oblige either of the parties in expenses.
(CA (Central Tel Aviv) 2417-06 EIM International Electronics Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation et al, issued 2.12.10, Registrar Esther Nahalieli-Hyatt; names of advocates not noted in the decision.)
About the Author
Gill Nadel - Born in Israel in 1969, graduated from Bar Ilan University`s Faculty of Law (cum laude) and from the Department of Musicology. He also has a master`s degree in law from the same institution. Member of the Israel Bar since 1999. Speaks Hebrew, English and Polish. Fields of expertise: Commercial and Business Law, International Trade Law, Import and Export Law, Intellectual Property Law, Maritime and International Forwarding Law, Litigation and Court Representation. Adv. Nadel provides lectures on international trade law and import and export law to in courses organized by the Bar Ilan University Center for Commercial Law, Israel Bar, Israel Chambers of Commerce, Manufacturers Association of Israel, Israel Export Institute, Customs Brokers Association, International Forwarders, and more.
Microsoft Cases
