Search Results

Search found 25902 results on 1037 pages for 'design vs customer'.

Page 10/1037 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • Design Issues With Forms

    - by ultan o'broin
    Interesting article on UX Matters, well worth reading, especially the idea that global design research can take for a better user experience in all languages: Label Placement in Austrian Forms, with Some Lessons for English Forms What is perhaps underplayed here is the cultural influence of how people worked with forms in the past, and how a proper global user-centered design process needs to address this issue and move usability gains (in the enterprise space, productivity especially) in the right direction.

    Read the article

  • SQL Saturday Birmingham #328 Database Design Precon In One Week

    - by drsql
    On September 22, I will be doing my "How to Design a Relational Database" pre-conference session in Birmingham, Alabama. You can see the abstract here if you are interested, and you can sign up there too, naturally. At just $100, which includes a free ebook copy of my database design book, it is a great bargain and I totally promise it will be a little over 7 hours of talking about and designing databases, which will certainly be better than what you do on a normal work day, even a Friday....(read more)

    Read the article

  • What do you think was a poor design choice in Java

    - by Phobia
    Java has been one of the most (the most?) popular programming languages till this day, but this also brought controversy as well. A lot of people now like to bash Java simply because "it's slow", or simply because it's not language X, for example. My question isn't related to any of these arguments at all, I simply want to know what you consider a design flaw, or a poor design choice in Java, and how it might be improved from your point of view. Something like this.

    Read the article

  • Book Review: SSIS Design Patterns

    - by andyleonard
    Samuel Vanga ( Blog | @SamuelVanga ) has posted a review of our new book SSIS Design Patterns at his blog . Several of Sam’s statements struck me, but none more than this: Within a few hours of reading SQL Server 2012 Integration Services Design Patterns , it stood out that none of the authors were trying to impress by showing what they all know in SSIS. Instead, they focused on describing solutions and patterns in a great detail (exactly why I paid for). Sam mentions he could not locate the source...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Design Patterns - Why the need for interfaces?

    - by Kyle Johnson
    OK. I am learning design patterns. Every time I see someone code an example of a design pattern they use interfaces. Here is an example: http://visualstudiomagazine.com/Articles/2013/06/18/the-facade-pattern-in-net.aspx?Page=1 Can someone explain to me why was the interfaces needed in this example to demonstrate the facade pattern? The program work if you pass in the classes to the facade instead of the interface. If I don't have interfaces does that mean

    Read the article

  • Design for an interface implementation that provides additional functionality

    - by Limbo Exile
    There is a design problem that I came upon while implementing an interface: Let's say there is a Device interface that promises to provide functionalities PerformA() and GetB(). This interface will be implemented for multiple models of a device. What happens if one model has an additional functionality CheckC() which doesn't have equivalents in other implementations? I came up with different solutions, none of which seems to comply with interface design guidelines: To add CheckC() method to the interface and leave one of its implementations empty: interface ISomeDevice { void PerformA(); int GetB(); bool CheckC(); } class DeviceModel1 : ISomeDevice { public void PerformA() { // do stuff } public int GetB() { return 1; } public bool CheckC() { bool res; // assign res a value based on some validation return res; } } class DeviceModel2 : ISomeDevice { public void PerformA() { // do stuff } public int GetB() { return 1; } public bool CheckC() { return true; // without checking anything } } This solution seems incorrect as a class implements an interface without truly implementing all the demanded methods. To leave out CheckC() method from the interface and to use explicit cast in order to call it: interface ISomeDevice { void PerformA(); int GetB(); } class DeviceModel1 : ISomeDevice { public void PerformA() { // do stuff } public int GetB() { return 1; } public bool CheckC() { bool res; // assign res a value based on some validation return res; } } class DeviceModel2 : ISomeDevice { public void PerformA() { // do stuff } public int GetB() { return 1; } } class DeviceManager { private ISomeDevice myDevice; public void ManageDevice(bool newDeviceModel) { myDevice = (newDeviceModel) ? new DeviceModel1() : new DeviceModel2(); myDevice.PerformA(); int b = myDevice.GetB(); if (newDeviceModel) { DeviceModel1 newDevice = myDevice as DeviceModel1; bool c = newDevice.CheckC(); } } } This solution seems to make the interface inconsistent. For the device that supports CheckC(): to add the logic of CheckC() into the logic of another method that is present in the interface. This solution is not always possible. So, what is the correct design to be used in such cases? Maybe creating an interface should be abandoned altogether in favor of another design?

    Read the article

  • Rule of thumb for enemy design

    - by Terrance
    I'm at the early stages of developing a 2d side scrolling open ended platformer (think metroidvania) and am having a bit of difficulty at enemy design inspiration for something of a scifi, nature, fantasy setting that isn't overly familar or obvious. I haven't seen too many articles blogs or books that talk about the subject at great length. Is there a fair rule of thumb when coming up with enemy design with respect to keeping your player engaged?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern to handle queries using multiple models

    - by coderkane
    I am presented with a dilemma while trying to re-designing the class structure for my PHP/MySQL application to make it more elegant and conform it to the SOLID principle. The problem goes like this: Let as assume, there is an abstract class called person which has certain properties to define a generic person, such as name, age, date of birth etc. There are two classes, student, and teacher, that implements this abstract class. They add their own unique properties to it. I have designed all the three classes to include all the operational logic (details of which are not relevant in context of the question). Now, I need to create views/reports/data grids which contain details from multiple classes, for example, say, a list of all students doing projects in Chemistry mentored by a teacher whose name is the parameter to the query. This is just one example of a view, there are many different views in the application, which uses data from 3-4 tables, and each of them have multiple input parameters to generate them. Considering this particular example, I have written the relevant query using JOIN and the results are as expected and proper, now here is the dilemma: Keeping in mind the single responsibility principle, where should I keep this query? It does not belong to either Student class, or Teacher class or any other classes currently present. a) Should I create a new class, say dataView class, and design it as a MVC pattern and keep the query there? What about the other views? how do they fit in this architecture? b) Should I not keep the query in code at all, and make it DB View ? c) Am I completely wrong in the approach? If so what is the right approach? My considerations are as follows: a) should be easy to add new views later on if requirement comes, without having to copy-paste-modify code b) would like to make it as loosely coupled as possible so that if minor db structure changes happen, it does not break I did google searches on report design and OOP report generators, but all the result seem to focus on the visual design of the report rather than fetching the data. I have already taken care of the visual aspect of the report using MVC with html templates. I am sure this is a very fundamental problem with known solution, but I am somehow not able to find it (maybe searching with wrong keyword). Edit1: Modified the title to make it more relevant Edit2: The accepted answer got me thinking in the right direction and identify my design flaws, which eventually led me to find this question and the solution in Stack Overflow which gave me the detailed answer to clear the confusion.

    Read the article

  • design an extendable database model

    - by wishi_
    Hi! Currently I'm doing a project whose specifications are unclear - well who doesn't. I wonder what's the best development strategy to design a DB, that's going to be extended sooner or later with additional tables and relations. I want to include "changeability". My main concern is that I want to apply design patterns (it's a university project) and I want to separate the constant factors from those, that change by choosing appropriate design patterns - in my case MVC and a set of sub-patterns at model level. When it comes to the DB however, I may have to resdesign my model in my MVC approach, because my domain model at a later stage my require a different set of classes representing the DB tables. I use Hibernate as an abstraction layer between DB and application. Would you start with a very minimal DB, just a few tables and relations? And what if I want an efficient DB, too? I wonder what strategies are applied in the real world. Stakeholder analysis for example isn't a sufficient planing solution when it comes to changing requirements. I think - at a DB level - my design pattern ends. So there's breach whose impact I'd like to minimize with a smart strategy.

    Read the article

  • The Customer Experience Imperative: A Game Changer for Brands

    - by Jeri Kelley
    By Anthony Lye, SVP, Cloud Applications Strategy, Oracle We know that customer experience has emerged as a primary differentiator for businesses today.  I’ve talked a lot about the new age of the empowered consumer. At Oracle we’ve spent a lot of time developing technologies and practices that our customers can implement to greatly improve their customer experience strategies. Of course I’m biased, but I think that we have created a portfolio of the best solutions on the planet to help organizations deal with the challenges of providing great customer experiences. We’ve done this because we started to witness some trends over the last few years. As the average person began to utilize social and mobile technologies more frequently and products commoditized, customer experience truly remained the only sustainable differentiator for businesses.In fact, we have seen that customer experience is often driving the success or the failure of a product or a brand. And as end customers have become more vocal about their experiences with companies on social and mobile channels, they now have the power to decide which brands will win and which brands will lose. To address this customer experience imperative, I believe that business today must do three things really well:Connect with your customers. You have to connect with customers whenever, wherever and however they want. Organizations must provide a great experience on their existing channels— the call center, the brick and mortar store, the field sales organizations, the websites and social properties. Businesses must also be great at managing and delivering journeys on these channels, while quickly adapting to embrace the new channels that emerge. You have to understand mobile. You have to understand social. You have to understand kiosks. These are all new routes to market, new channels where your customers may or may not show up. You have to interact with them where they are. You have to present information in a way that's meaningful to them. As well as providing what we would call a multichannel experience. We have to recognize that customers may start their experience on one channel, but end it on a different channel. It’s important that an organization’s technology solutions enable, not just a multichannel strategy, but a strategy that can power new channels and create customer journeys that cross these channels.Get to know your customers. Next, companies need to get to know the customer as intimately as the customer will allow. Today most customer interactions are anonymous, but it’s important for brands to know which customers drive value. Customers want to provide feedback. They want to share their opinions, but they want to know that those opinions are being heard and acted upon. For this to occur, we need to know much more about the customer and then reward them for their loyalty and for their advocacy.Enable connections. The last thing is to enable people to connect or transact with your brand. We've got to make it really, really simple for customers to do business with us. We can't make them repeat the steps; we can't make them tell us their identity for the fifth time as they move between organizations. These silos can no longer sustain or deliver a good customer experience. It's extremely important that companies be where customers want them to be—that we create profitable journeys for us and for them.Organizations have to make sure that there is a single source of truth that defines the customer. We have to make sure that the technology applications that we rely on understand not just the dimensions of multichannel, but of cross-channel too. We have to enable social at the very core of the overall architecture. We have to use historical analytics, real-time decisioning as well as predictive analytics to help personalize and drive an experience. And these are all technologies that IT needs, that IT is familiar with, but needs to enable for the line of business that in turn can enable for the end customer.  This means that we've got to make our solutions available to the customers in the cloud.In this new age of the empowered consumer, businesses have to focus on delivery mechanisms that reduce the overall TCO, while driving a rapid rate of innovation and a more rapid rate of deployment. At the Oracle Customer Experience Summit @ OpenWorld, I’ll discuss these issues and more. I hope that you can join us for what promises to be an unforgettable experience.

    Read the article

  • Mark Hurd on the Customer Revolution: Oracle's Top 10 Insights

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    Reprint of an article from Forbes Businesses that fail to focus on customer experience will hear a giant sucking sound from their vanishing profitability. Because in today’s dynamic global marketplace, consumers now hold the power in the buyer-seller equation, and sellers need to revamp their strategy for this new world order. The ability to relentlessly deliver connected, personalized and rewarding customer experiences is rapidly becoming one of the primary sources of competitive advantage in today’s dynamic global marketplace. And the inability or unwillingness to realize that the customer is a company’s most important asset will lead, inevitably, to decline and failure. Welcome to the lifecycle of customer experience, in which consumers explore, engage, shop, buy, ask, compare, complain, socialize, exchange, and more across multiple channels with the unconditional expectation that each of those interactions will be completed in an efficient and personalized manner however, wherever, and whenever the customer wants. While many niche companies are offering point solutions within that sprawling and complex spectrum of needs and requirements, businesses looking to deliver superb customer experiences are still left having to do multiple product evaluations, multiple contract negotiations, multiple test projects, multiple deployments, and–perhaps most annoying of all–multiple and never-ending integration projects to string together all those niche products from all those niche vendors. With its new suite of customer-experience solutions, Oracle believes it can help companies unravel these challenges and move at the speed of their customers, anticipating their needs and desires and creating enduring and profitable relationships. Those solutions span the full range of marketing, selling, commerce, service, listening/insights, and social and collaboration tools for employees. When Oracle launched its suite of Customer Experience solutions at a recent event in New York City, president Mark Hurd analyzed the customer experience revolution taking place and presented Oracle’s strategy for empowering companies to capitalize on this important market shift. From Hurd’s presentation and related materials, I’ve extracted a list of Hurd’s Top 10 Insights into the Customer Revolution. 1. Please Don’t Feed the Competitor’s Pipeline!After enduring a poor experience, 89% of consumers say they would immediately take their business to your competitor. (Except where noted, the source for these findings is the 2011 Customer Experience Impact (CEI) Report including a survey commissioned by RightNow (acquired by Oracle in March 2012) and conducted by Harris Interactive.) 2. The Addressable Market Is Massive. Only 1% of consumers say their expectations were always met by their actual experiences. 3. They’re Willing to Pay More! In return for a great experience, 86% of consumers say they’ll pay up to 25% more. 4. The Social Media Microphone Is Always Live. After suffering through a poor experience, more than 25% of consumers said they posted a negative comment on Twitter or Facebook or other social media sites. Conversely, of those consumers who got a response after complaining, 22% posted positive comments about the company. 5.  The New Deal Is Never Done: Embrace the Entire Customer Lifecycle. An appropriately active and engaged relationship, says Hurd, extends across every step of the entire processs: need, research, select, purchase, receive, use, maintain, and recommend. 6. The 360-Degree Commitment. Customers want to do business with companies that actively and openly demonstrate the desire to establish strong and seamless connections across employees, the company, and the customer, says research firm Temkin Group in its report called “The CX Competencies.” 7. Understand the Emotional Drivers Behind Brand Love. What makes consumers fall in love with a brand? Among the top factors are friendly employees and customer reps (73%), easy access to information and support (55%), and personalized experiences, such as when companies know precisely what products or services customers have purchased in the past and what issues those customers have raised (36%). 8.  The Importance of Immediate Action. You’ve got one week to respond–and then the opportunity’s lost. If your company needs more than a week to answer a prospect’s question or request, most of those prospects will terminate the relationship. 9.  Want More Revenue, Less Churn, and More Referrals? Then improve the overall customer experience: Forrester’s research says that approach put an extra $900 million in the pockets of wireless service providers, $800 million for hotels, and $400 million for airlines. 10. The Formula for CX Success.  Hurd says it includes three elegantly interlaced factors: Connected Engagement, to personalize the experience; Actionable Insight, to maximize the engagement; and Optimized Execution, to deliver on the promise of value. RECOMMENDED READING: The Top 10 Strategic CIO Issues For 2013 Wal-Mart, Amazon, eBay: Who’s the Speed King of Retail? Career Suicide and the CIO: 4 Deadly New Threats Memo to Marc Benioff: Social Is a Tool, Not an App

    Read the article

  • How to do fixed price quote for design sessions?

    - by Shaul
    Normally when I do a system for a customer, I do design sessions on an hourly rate and then come out with a fixed price quotation for the full system development. Now this customer has thrown me a curveball: he doesn't want an hourly rate for design, either - he wants me to quote a fixed price to do all the design, too! Not that he's trying to cheap out, but he doesn't want to be in a situation where the longer design stretches out, the more he has to pay - and I can understand that. For the business layer it was actually not too difficult to work with this, because from his original functional spec I got a good idea of what the core business objects were, and in our design agreement I defined several objects which would be covered by a fixed design price; if any new non-trivial objects were discovered, they would be considered variances, and those would be billed on an hourly rate. So far so good. But when it comes to the UI, things start getting a lot more woolly. How many screens will there be? Don't know yet. What's going to be on each screen? Don't know yet. All we know is that it's a "dashboard" type of system, and there will be a lot of visual reporting involved e.g. gauges, graphs, etc. So maybe make it fixed price per screen design? Not a great definition; he might say that everything is going to be on one screen. Maybe a price per "visual report" design, including ability to slice & dice? Again not so easy - it might be that the entire system is just one report, and all the intelligence is going to go into how to present that segmentation. Anyone have any ideas how to do a fixed price quotation for a UI design like this?

    Read the article

  • Advices fo starting a video game design career

    - by Allen Gabriel Baker
    I'm 24 and have a passion for video games and game-design. I've decided I want to design video games as my career. I have no experience with designing video games or coding but I'm interested and willing to learn. I want a job at any level but what would I need to land a job? I have no college experience and I have no money. What is a cheap school, or do I really need to go to school for this, or can I learn on my own? Is it possible to do this with no money? I'm literally broke but I want this so bad I feel like its the only career I'll enjoy. I want to call up company's and ask them what they are looking for in someone they want to hire, is that a good idea? Also I don't know the history of video game design and I don't want to sound like a dummy when someone says something about this field or talks about a famous designer and I have no idea who they're talking about. So what is key info when it comes to this field and where should I find it? Hopefully some of you guys and girls can help me out: I know in the future I will create something everyone will enjoy and you guys will remember when you gave me advice and I will always remember you guys for helping me. I'm gifted I know I am and I want to share my gift with the rest of the world by making games that change the Industry. Help me out please.

    Read the article

  • Online betting system design [closed]

    - by Rafal
    I am a Computer Science student, preparing for my exam in software engineering. I am strugging with answering one of the sample questions to the scenario below. My understanding is that the system design approach should probably be a mixture of agile and plan driven elements but - since I've no practical experience - it's hard for me to decide on the balance and tolls that should be used. I will appreciate any hints from experienced business analysts who were involved in similar kind of projects. Ray Sing is the owner of “Last Betz", a bookmakers with 7 outlets across Louth and Meath. With the advent of smartphones Ray would now like to allow his clients to place their bets online using their mobile devices. Clients would register for an account and password and would log their credit card details via the Last Betz website. To begin using the facility customers must 'load' their accounts with 100 euros. Any winnings, minus commission, will be placed in the account whilst any losses will be automatically deducted from the account. Assuming you have been selected to develop the above system: How would you approach the design of this system? Discuss the design methods and models you would use.

    Read the article

  • How effectively "sell" a good design in large meetings

    - by User1
    Many times I have witnessed a sad tragedy. Here's what happens: A team design review for a new project. I see a simple design that has quite a few holes. I casually mention the holes and ways to avoid them. The warnings are ignored with comments like "that 'never' happen in real life" Eventually the things that "will 'never' happen" happen An emergency team design review for a broken project. So what do I do? Copping the "I told you so" attitude is not going to win friends and influence people. Sometimes years go by and the comments from step 3 are forgotten anyway. I definitely don't want to be the annoying pest reminding the world of the gotchas. I often sit back and watch the Titanic sail off to Europe. It's frustrating to see bad designs move forward. It's also frustrating that I can't seem to convince others of the pending peril of the current path. I do worst on team meetings where everyone has different ways of understanding different terms. Also, egos tend to win of reason and thought. I'm looking for good tactics to convince groups people to use some new and complicated ideas.

    Read the article

  • Design in "mixed" languages: object oriented design or functional programming?

    - by dema80
    In the past few years, the languages I like to use are becoming more and more "functional". I now use languages that are a sort of "hybrid": C#, F#, Scala. I like to design my application using classes that correspond to the domain objects, and use functional features where this makes coding easier, more coincise and safer (especially when operating on collections or when passing functions). However the two worlds "clash" when coming to design patterns. The specific example I faced recently is the Observer pattern. I want a producer to notify some other code (the "consumers/observers", say a DB storage, a logger, and so on) when an item is created or changed. I initially did it "functionally" like this: producer.foo(item => { updateItemInDb(item); insertLog(item) }) // calls the function passed as argument as an item is processed But I'm now wondering if I should use a more "OO" approach: interface IItemObserver { onNotify(Item) } class DBObserver : IItemObserver ... class LogObserver: IItemObserver ... producer.addObserver(new DBObserver) producer.addObserver(new LogObserver) producer.foo() //calls observer in a loop Which are the pro and con of the two approach? I once heard a FP guru say that design patterns are there only because of the limitations of the language, and that's why there are so few in functional languages. Maybe this could be an example of it? EDIT: In my particular scenario I don't need it, but.. how would you implement removal and addition of "observers" in the functional way? (I.e. how would you implement all the functionalities in the pattern?) Just passing a new function, for example?

    Read the article

  • What's the point of the Prototype design pattern?

    - by user1905391
    So I'm learning about design patterns in school. Many of them are silly little ideas, but nevertheless solve some recurring problems(singleton, adapters, asynchronous polling, ect). But today I was told about the so called 'Prototype' design pattern. I must be missing something, because I don't see any benefits from it. I've seen people online say it's faster than using "new"' but this is doesn't make any sense, since at some point, regardless how the new object is created, memory needs to be allocated for it ect. Furthermore, doesn't this pattern run in the same circles as the 'chicken or egg' problem? By this I mean, since the prototype pattern essentially is just cloning objects, at some point the original object must be created itself (ie, not cloned). So this would mean, that I would need to have an existing copy of every object that I would ever want to clone already ready to clone? Seems stupid to me. Can anyone explain what the use of this pattern is? Original post: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13887704/whats-the-point-of-the-prototype-design-pattern

    Read the article

  • [C#][Design] Appropriate programming design questions.

    - by Edward
    I have a few questions on good programming design. I'm going to first describe the project I'm building so you are better equipped to help me out. I am coding a Remote Assistance Tool similar to TeamViewer, Microsoft Remote Desktop, CrossLoop. It will incorporate concepts like UDP networking (using Lidgren networking library), NAT traversal (since many computers are invisible behind routers nowadays), Mirror Drivers (using DFMirage's Mirror Driver (http://www.demoforge.com/dfmirage.htm) for realtime screen grabbing on the remote computer). That being said, this program has a concept of being a client-server architecture, but I made only one program with both the functionality of client and server. That way, when the user runs my program, they can switch between giving assistance and receiving assistance without having to download a separate client or server module. I have a Windows Form that allows the user to choose between giving assistance and receiving assistance. I have another Windows Form for a file explorer module. I have another Windows Form for a chat module. I have another Windows Form form for a registry editor module. I have another Windows Form for the live control module. So I've got a Form for each module, which raises the first question: 1. Should I process module-specific commands inside the code of the respective Windows Form? Meaning, let's say I get a command with some data that enumerates the remote user's files for a specific directory. Obviously, I would have to update this on the File Explorer Windows Form and add the entries to the ListView. Should I be processing this code inside the Windows Form though? Or should I be handling this in another class (although I have to eventually pass the data to the Form to draw, of course). Or is it like a hybrid in which I process most of the data in another class and pass the final result to the Form to draw? So I've got like 5-6 forms, one for each module. The user starts up my program, enters the remote machine's ID (not IP, ID, because we are registering with an intermediary server to enable NAT traversal), their password, and connects. Now let's suppose the connection is successful. Then the user is presented with a form with all the different modules. So he can open up a File Explorer, or he can mess with the Registry Editor, or he can choose to Chat with his buddy. So now the program is sort of idle, just waiting for the user to do something. If the user opens up Live Control, then the program will be spending most of it's time receiving packets from the remote machine and drawing them to the form to provide a 'live' view. 2. Second design question. A spin off question #1. How would I pass module-specific commands to their respective Windows Forms? What I mean is, I have a class like "NetworkHandler.cs" that checks for messages from the remote machine. NetworkHandler.cs is a static class globally accessible. So let's say I get a command that enumerates the remote user's files for a specific directory. How would I "give" that command to the File Explorer Form. I was thinking of making an OnCommandReceivedEvent inside NetworkHandler, and having each form register to that event. When the NetworkHandler received a command, it would raise the event, all forms would check it to see if it was relevant, and the appropriate form would take action. Is this an appropriate/the best solution available? 3. The networking library I'm using, Lidgren, provides two options for checking networking messages. One can either poll ReadMessage() to return null or a message, or one can use an AutoResetEvent OnMessageReceived (I'm guessing this is like an event). Which one is more appropriate?

    Read the article

  • Convert table base design to table less design in best way

    - by Brij
    What is the best optimized way to convert following in table less design? the layout should be cross browser compatible and SEO Friendly. <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td>Row 1 Column 1</td> <td>Row 1 Column 2</td> <td>Row 1 Column 3</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" align="center">Row 2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Row 3</td> <td align="right" colspan="2"><img src="test.jpg" alt="test" /></td> </tr> </table>

    Read the article

  • Software Design & Web Service Design

    - by 001
    I'm about to design my Web service API, most of the functions of my API is basically very simular to my web application. Now the question is, should I create 1 single method and reuse them for both the web application and the web service api? (This seems to be the logical solution, however its very complicated; it's much easier to duplicate the method used by the web application, and keep both separate, ie one method for the web application and one method for the web service.) How do you guys do it? 1) REUSE: one main method and reuse them for both web application and web service application (I like this but it's complicated) WebAppMethodX --uses-- COMMONFUNCTIONMETHOD_X APIMethodX ---uses---- COMMONFUNCTIONMETHOD_X ie common function performs functions such as creating/updating/deleting records etc 2) DUPLICATE: two methods, one method for the web application and one method for the web service. WebAppMethodX APIMethodX

    Read the article

  • Creating a dummy design before the development starts

    - by NLV
    Hello How can i create a dummy design of an application before the actual development starts? How to simulate the UI of the application. After completing the analysis phase do i need to start the design directly using dev tools or can i create some dummies (even images, using Visio or something) with other tools? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Customer Experience and BPM – From Efficiency to Engagement

    - by Ajay Khanna
    Over the last few years, focus of BPM has been mainly to improve the businesses efficiency. To create more efficient processes, to remove bottlenecks, to automate processes. That still holds true and why not? Isn’t BPM all about continuous improvement? BPM facilitates and requires business and IT collaboration. But business also requires working with customer. Do we not want to get close to and collaborate with our customers? This is where Social BPM takes BPM a step further. It not only allows people within an organization to collaborate to design exceptional processes, not only lets them collaborate on resolving a case but also let them engage with the customers. Engaging with customer means, first of all, connecting with them on their terms and turf. Take a new account opening process. Can a customer call you and initiate the process? Can a customer email you, or go to the website and initiate the process? Can they tweet you and initiate the process? Can they check the status of process via any channel they like? Can they take a picture of damaged package delivery and kick-off a returns process from their mobile device, with GIS data? Yes, these are various aspects to consider during process design if the goal is better customer experience and engagement. Of course, we want to be efficient and agile, but the focus here needs to be the customer. Now when the customer is tweeting about your products, posting on Facebook and Yelp about their experience with your company (and your process), you need to seek out that information. You need to gather and analyze the customer’s feedback on the social media and use that information to improve the processes and products. This is an excellent source of product and process ideation. So BPM is no longer only about improving back-office process efficiency, it is moving into a new and exciting phase of improving frontline customer facing processes, customer experience and engagement. Let me know how you think BPM can enhance customer experience.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >