I know you have the ability to change field sizes in the X3 Development area and then run validate to make the changes push out to the related objects. However there are areas of hardcoding as well as ADC, Requester, Crystal Reports, etc that would still be a problem. Sage talks about migration path for Sage 500 to Sage X3 yet in doing so someone would have to shrink down field sizes in order to do so.
For example VendorID, ItemID(ProductID), Item Description, etc.
by: Joe N. | over a year ago | General
Comments
Product Id is a common request.
Agreed - It is difficult to explain to a client - the Sage 100 Item identifier allows more characters.
Product Description and GL description is a common request
# 1 - PRODUCT ID: A client in NC with 200,000 products in MAS500 is migrating to X3. The downsizing of product IDs in MAS500 to 20 characters for X3 (with no special characters other than '-', '_' or '/' has been a very lengthy and painful process for this client. There has been downstream kick-out impact, not just in the product file, but product-sites, product costs, list prices, discount prices, inventory balances, etc.
We also just scoped a second client in CA who is moving from from 100 to X3 this week. When they learned that the product ID field in X3 is only 20 characters and doesn't allow specials, they also expressed dismay about the need to change their existing product numbers in order to migrate to the new system.
# 2 - PRODUCT DESCRIPTION: The NC client is also accustomed to using the MAS500 long description field for products. We had to create a custom long description field in X3 and the update all customer-facing Crystal forms (PO, SO, Invoice) to display the new custom long description field.
# 3 - VENDOR PRODUCT ID: Client can't control the size of their vendor product IDs. So we had to customize (increase) the size of the vendor product ID field from 20 characters to 50 characters as well.
MAS500 to X3 migrations will be much quicker and easier on the client if these adjustments aren't needed in the future. Thanks for helping!
Sage 500 customers wanting to migrate to Sage X3 often times will ask if the migration path is established and if their data will be converted in a clean manner. Having to tell them that certain, already established data in Sage 500 fields, might need to be decreased in size, will not go over well. In my opinion, I believe this is critical to successful migrations as well future happy clients ! Thank you....
Very common request! Actually this legal requirement - unnecessary part of localization. I believe all countries commecial registers allow longer names companies than in X3. As well as all tax authorities allow longer financial account names than in X3
We had the same problem when we same to X3 years ago and had to change all of our part numbers. It was a manual process and not all were changed the same so we lost the consistency that we had in the part numbering scheme.