Chris McFarland
My feedback
150 results found
-
10 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
Not fun hearing my clients tell me that leaving DocuWare is an option if this new interface is forced on them. The thoughts on this ticket are common things to hear, and only compounded by so many small features that are daily drivers for people not being there at all. At its best the new interface requires more clicks to do something, but at its worst core ways that DocuWare works aren't carried over and these are deal breakers for the users. Sure, add cool new things to the new interface. Things we haven't had before. Awesome. But for the love of all that is good in the world carry over everything from the old client. I feel like there would be very few features, functions, capabilities and general modes of operation in the old client that should not come over.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
Yes, this is super common. To share a document tray. Anyone needs to be able to pull from the pool. Needing to update to a new interface I get, to not carefully carry over all of the functionality I do not get. We really have to log requests for each little thing that was not carried over that makes the new client unusable for our users? Unusable in that the things they do are not possible.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesThank you for your idea. Our product team is reviewing it now. If you can tell us more about your use case, for example what you are trying to achieve and how you work around it today, please add a comment. It helps us make the right decision.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
This filtering is a critical function in the dashboard capacity for Monitor Tasks and also for managing tasks in general. Weird thing not to have carried over. A lot of things seem to be missing that are weird things not to carry over. As long as they go in, I suppose.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesThank you for your idea. Our product team is reviewing it now. If you can tell us more about your use case, for example what you are trying to achieve and how you work around it today, please add a comment. It helps us make the right decision.Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesChris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
10 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesThank you for your idea. We have planned it and expect to start working on it shortly. We will update this idea when it becomes available.Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
10 votes
Thank you for sharing your idea with us. We have received it, and our product team will review it soon. Votes and comments from other users help us understand how much it matters, so feel free to share it with your colleagues.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
Seems like it's more common to want the history than to not care if it's there. Would be a good move to add it and appreciated by the system owners, for sure.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
38 votes
Your idea has been added to our backlog. We are now further investigating the idea.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
I see what you're describing in Forms, but not for a store dialog. I have a lot of processes where there will be one single row of data matching on the first field that we'll populate. What I'm seeing is that in a store dialog there is no automatic population at all. The ticket refers to store dialog specifically, and for me that's where I'd most like to see it. If you're seeing any kind of automatic population in a store dialog then I'm interested. Maybe there is a way.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
This is big one. A form is so much nicer looking than a task and all of the workarounds are pretty clunky. People see to expect it and are disappointed when they see that we have to go to tasks instead, or using Export to get the form as a PDF (in that case you lose control of the form, too, and editing is wide open).
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
I'm often trying to puzzle how ways around not being able to have following people go into the web form and interact with it just like the first user did. Really need this one.
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris McFarland
commented
Oh yeah, this is a good one. So clunky when I have to have a user punch in some data and then confirm the task, only to wait to have the same task come back to them with the calculations made. It's common to need to do that, too. Both in table fields and also just in general, any kind of live calculations, field behavior rules (show this if that is filled in but hide it if it isn't) or case specific validations (show this error if this condtion exists but then show another message if this other condition exists) would be greatly appreciated.
Chris McFarland
supported this idea
·
Got this one from a client just this morning.