Changes between Version 11 and Version 12 of projects/crm_review/report


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jun 26, 2008, 5:48:23 PM (17 years ago)
Author:
Jamie McClelland
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • projects/crm_review/report

    v11 v12  
    134134On first pass through, I'm not seeing sophisticated access controls - there's admin and not admin.
    135135
    136 On my browser, it's beautiful and very well designed. If I had to navigate on a tiny mobile device I might commit suicide. I don't see any mobile version of the interface either. Google [ http://www.google.com/search?q=sugarcrm%20mobile%20device lots of ways people are integrating SugarCRM into their mobile devices], including a [http://www.ienterprises.com/sugar-crm-mobile proprietary blackberry program].
     136On my browser, it's beautiful and very well designed. If I had to navigate on a tiny mobile device I might commit suicide. I don't see any mobile version of the interface either. Google [http://www.google.com/search?q=sugarcrm%20mobile%20device shows lots of ways people are integrating SugarCRM into their mobile devices], including a [http://www.ienterprises.com/sugar-crm-mobile proprietary blackberry program].
    137137
    138138=== Membership metrics ===
     
    148148Haven't looked under the hood yet.
    149149
     150== vtiger ==
     151
     152=== Basic Member Info ===
     153
     154On the positive side - Only two postal addresses are allowed (one is primary). Contacts can be assigned to a login name. And - it took all of 10 seconds to figure out how to add my own custom fields to any of the screens. Very nice.
     155
     156On the negative side, ''on first run through'': only room for one email (you can opt out, but can't indicate that it is bad). I can't find anyway to indicate that an address or phone number is bad. Although I'm sure it's here somewhere, I don't easily see how I can track any kind of demographic data, indicate when the best time to reach people is (aside from using the generic description field), indicate what type of person it is (ally, member, etc), add voter data, or indicate what relationship they have to the organization.
     157
     158=== Individual vs. Group/Household identity ===
     159
     160Like SugarCRM, there are contacts and accounts. You can assign a contact to an account. Unlike SugarCRM there is no way to link an account to another account.
     161
     162No indication of household.
     163
     164=== Interactions and Transactions ===
     165
     166Like SugarCRM there is an endless list of potential transactions for each contact and each account - all geared out of the box for selling things to people.
     167
     168=== General Reporting/Exporting ===
     169
     170There is a generic export (and import) button. In addition, I much much prefer the search feature of vtiger to SugarCRM. The simple search is, well, a simple search. The advanced search allows you to select from every available field (including the custom one I added) and then indicate whether you want a boolean and/or search).
     171
     172In addition, they have a full on reports area with a list of built-in reports that can be viewed on screen, exported to a spread sheet or printed as PDF. And they have nice wizards allowing you to customize the input and output of the reports.
     173
     174=== Access/Controls ===
     175
     176The access control is amazingly granular. You have users and groups and roles and profiles. You can drill down to individual fields (including custom fields). I haven't really explored it carefully, but on first glance it looks extremely sophisticated.
     177
     178vtiger seems to be in the [http://www.google.com/search?q=vtiger%20mobile%20device same boat as SugarCRM] when it comes to access on mobile devices.
     179
     180=== Membership metrics ===
     181
     182Same as SugarCRM...
     183
     184=== Usability ===
     185
     186Not as elegant as SugarCRM - however, a reasonably easy to use interface nonetheless.
     187
     188=== Developer/Code ===
     189
     190Haven't looked under the hood yet.