Search Results

Search found 27207 results on 1089 pages for 'preferred solution'.

Page 2/1089 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • BonitaSoft sort Bonita Open Solution 5.6 et propose de tester gratuitement sa solution de gestion des processus métier open-source

    BonitaSoft sort Bonita Open Solution 5.6 Et propose de tester gratuitement sa solution de gestion des processus métier open-source BonitaSoft, un des leaders de la gestion des processus métier (BPM) open source, a annoncé la sortie de Bonita Open Solution 5.6. Cette nouvelle version intègre des mises à niveau importantes proposées au sein d'une nouvelle gamme de solutions BPM pour « maximiser la productivité, accélérer la mise en production d'applications basées sur des processus métier, et de sécuriser les déploiements critiques ». La suite Bonita Open Solution est conçue pour répondre aux besoins évolutifs de projets BPM qui requièrent davantage de collaboration entre les utilisa...

    Read the article

  • Problem Solving vs. Solution Finding

    - by ryanabr
    By enlarge, most developers fall into these two camps I will try to explain what I mean by way of example. A manager gives the developer a task that is communicated like this: “Figure out why control A is not loading on this form”. Now, right there it could be argued that the manager should probably have given better direction and said something more like: “Control A is not loading on the Form, fix it”. They might sound like the same thing to most people, but the first statement will have the developer problem solving the reason why it is failing. The second statement should have the developer looking for the solution to make it work, not focus on why it is broken. In the end, they might be the same thing, but I usually see the first approach take way longer than the second approach. The Problem Solver: The problem solver’s approach to fixing something that is broken is likely to take the error or behavior that is being observed and start to research it using a tool like Google, or any other search engine. 7/10 times this will yield results for the most common of issues. The challenge is in the other 30% of issues that will take the problem solver down the rabbit hole and cause them not to surface for days on end while every avenue is explored for the cause of the problem. In the end, they will probably find the cause of the issue and resolve it, but the cost can be days, or weeks of work. The Solution Finder: The solution finder’s approach to a problem will begin the same way the Problem Solver’s approach will. The difference comes in the more difficult cases. Rather than stick to the pure “This has to work so I am going to work with it until it does” approach, the Solution Finder will look for other ways to get the requirements satisfied that may or may not be using the original approach. For example. there are two area of an application of externally equivalent features, meaning that from a user’s perspective, the behavior is the same. So, say that for whatever reason, area A is now not working, but area B is working. The Problem Solver will dig in to see why area A is broken, where the Solution Finder will investigate to see what is the difference between the two areas and solve the problem by potentially working around it. The other notable difference between the two types of developers described is what point they reach before they re-emerge from their task. The problem solver will likely emerge with a triumphant “I have found the problem” where as the Solution Finder will emerge with the more useful “I have the solution”. Conclusion At the end of the day, users are what drives features in software development. With out users there is no need for software. In todays world of software development with so many tools to use, and generally tight schedules I believe that a work around to a problem that takes 8 hours vs. the more pure solution to the problem that takes 40 hours is a more fruitful approach.

    Read the article

  • Building vs. Buying a Master Data Management Solution

    - by david.butler(at)oracle.com
    Many organizations prefer to build their own MDM solutions. The argument is that they know their data quality issues and their data better than anyone. Plus a focused solution will cost less in the long run then a vendor supplied general purpose product. This is not unreasonable if you think of MDM as a point solution for a particular data quality problem. But this approach carries significant risk. We now know that organizations achieve significant competitive advantages when they deploy MDM as a strategic enterprise wide solution: with the most common best practice being to deploy a tactical MDM solution and grow it into a full information architecture. A build your own approach most certainly will not scale to a larger architecture unless it is done correctly with the larger solution in mind. It is possible to build a home grown point MDM solution in such a way that it will dovetail into broader MDM architectures. A very good place to start is to use the same basic technologies that Oracle uses to build its own MDM solutions. Start with the Oracle 11g database to create a flexible, extensible and open data model to hold the master data and all needed attributes. The Oracle database is the most flexible, highly available and scalable database system on the market. With its Real Application Clusters (RAC) it can even support the mixed OLTP and BI workloads that represent typical MDM data access profiles. Use Oracle Data Integration (ODI) for batch data movement between applications, MDM data stores, and the BI layer. Use Oracle Golden Gate for more real-time data movement. Use Oracle's SOA Suite for application integration with its: BPEL Process Manager to orchestrate MDM connections to business processes; Identity Management for managing users; WS Manager for managing web services; Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition for analytics; and JDeveloper for creating or extending the MDM management application. Oracle utilizes these technologies to build its MDM Hubs.  Customers who build their own MDM solution using these components will easily migrate to Oracle provided MDM solutions when the home grown solution runs out of gas. But, even with a full stack of open flexible MDM technologies, creating a robust MDM application can be a daunting task. For example, a basic MDM solution will need: a set of data access methods that support master data as a service as well as direct real time access as well as batch loads and extracts; a data migration service for initial loads and periodic updates; a metadata management capability for items such as business entity matrixed relationships and hierarchies; a source system management capability to fully cross-reference business objects and to satisfy seemingly conflicting data ownership requirements; a data quality function that can find and eliminate duplicate data while insuring correct data attribute survivorship; a set of data quality functions that can manage structured and unstructured data; a data quality interface to assist with preventing new errors from entering the system even when data entry is outside the MDM application itself; a continuing data cleansing function to keep the data up to date; an internal triggering mechanism to create and deploy change information to all connected systems; a comprehensive role based data security system to control and monitor data access, update rights, and maintain change history; a flexible business rules engine for managing master data processes such as privacy and data movement; a user interface to support casual users and data stewards; a business intelligence structure to support profiling, compliance, and business performance indicators; and an analytical foundation for directly analyzing master data. Oracle's pre-built MDM Hub solutions are full-featured 3-tier Internet applications designed to participate in the full Oracle technology stack or to run independently in other open IT SOA environments. Building MDM solutions from scratch can take years. Oracle's pre-built MDM solutions can bring quality data to the enterprise in a matter of months. But if you must build, at lease build with the world's best technology stack in a way that simplifies the eventual upgrade to Oracle MDM and to the full enterprise wide information architecture that it enables.

    Read the article

  • DNASTREAM’s RapidLaunch Oracle Accelerate solution for RightNow

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    The Oracle RightNow Accelerate solution from DNASTREAM allows each Customer to enjoy quicker deployment and earlier time to benefits from this SAAS Customer Experience solution. At the start of the project, a full suite of E-Learning simulations & materials is provided by DNASTREAM to match the customer’s processes. This RapidLaunch content library for RightNow can be leveraged by our customers early in their project implementations bringing significant cost efficiencies, time reduction and improved user adoption to their project roll outs. Solution Profile: This Oracle Accelerate solution is based on Oracle RightNow CX that includes Content management, Contact management, Incident management, Customer Portal, Closed incident Survey, Standard reports. As an additional option there is available the Oracle RightNow CX Chat implementation. For more information about RightNow and the DNASTREAM Accelerate solution, visit the Oracle Accelerate microsite or contact www.dnastream.com

    Read the article

  • Emailing Interviewer after interview regarding technical solution

    - by Raghav Shankar
    I had an interview yesterday where I was given a programming problem and I was asked to figure the optimal solution for it. I gave a solution that worked in linear time, but used 2 loops (not inner loops). At the end of the interview, the interviewer saw I was interested in solving the problem, so he said the optimal solution uses only one loop and has linear complexity and at the end of the interview I had asked for his card and he gave one to me. I think I might have figured out a solution and I was wondering if it's alright to email the recruiter thanking him for his time and also mentioning about the solution I had figured out?

    Read the article

  • Looking for Non Hosted Audio & Video Podcasting Solution for Church Websites

    - by motboys
    I am looking for a solution that will do the following: User uploads audio and/or video files with title, desc. image etc Solution embeds info into ID3 tags Solution generates RSS feed Solution embeds new content in our website Content on website is searchable This is for a couple of church websites I manage. I am looking for the ability to do the above with a sermon mp3 and also a video. At the moment we are doing it with multiple steps / people involved and I want to automate the process. I can't seem to find a solution that does all of the above. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • C# Solution - How many projects?

    - by Oskar Kjellin
    Hey, I googled this a little but couldn't find a good result. Right now I'm building a web site and I'm trying to make it as correct as possible from a design point of view from the beginning. The problem I'm now facing is that when deciding to start with logging I needed a project to place this code in. As I could not find a suitable place in my currect projects I thought: hey, why not a logging class library? Is there a general guideline on how many projects you should have? I know this would be a rather small project but it would be nice to entirely get it out of my way! Any hints are appreciated :)

    Read the article

  • The True Cost of a Solution

    - by D'Arcy Lussier
    I had a Twitter chat recently with someone suggesting Oracle and SQL Server were losing out to OSS (Open Source Software) in the enterprise due to their issues with scaling or being too generic (one size fits all). I challenged that a bit, as my experience with enterprise sized clients has been different – adverse to OSS but receptive to an established vendor. The response I got was: Found it easier to influence change by showing how X can’t solve our problems or X is extremely costly to scale. Money talks. I think this is definitely the right approach for anyone pitching an alternate or alien technology as part of a solution: identify the issue, identify the solution, then present pros and cons including a cost/benefit analysis. What can happen though is we get tunnel vision and don’t present a full view of the costs associated with a solution. An “Acura”te Example (I’m so clever…) This is my dream vehicle, a Crystal Black Pearl coloured Acura MDX with the SH-AWD package! We’re a family of 4 (5 if my daughters ever get their wish of adding a dog), and I’ve always wanted a luxury type of vehicle, so this is a perfect replacement in a few years when our Rav 4 has hit the 8 – 10 year mark. MSRP – $62,890 But as we all know, that’s not *really* the cost of the vehicle. There’s taxes and fees added on, there’s the extended warranty if I choose to purchase it, there’s the finance rate that needs to be factored in… MSRP –   $62,890 Taxes –      $7,546 Warranty - $2,500 SubTotal – $72,936 Finance Charge – $ 1094.04 Grand Total – $74,030 Well! Glad we did that exercise – we discovered an extra $11k added on to the MSRP! Well now we have our true price…or do we? Lifetime of the Vehicle I’m expecting to have this vehicle for 7 – 10 years. While the hard cost of the vehicle is known and dealt with, the costs to run and maintain the vehicle are on top of this. I did some research, and here’s what I’ve found: Fuel and Mileage Gas prices are high as it is for regular fuel, but getting into an MDX will require that I *only* purchase premium fuel, which comes at a premium price. I need to expect my bill at the pump to be higher. Comparing the MDX to my 2007 Rav4 also shows I’ll be gassing up more often. The Rav4 has a city MPG of 21, while the MDX plummets to 16! The MDX does have a bigger fuel tank though, so all in all the number of times I hit the pumps might even out. Still, I estimate I’ll be spending approximately $8000 – $10000 more on gas over a 10 year period than my current Rav4. Service Options Limited Although I have options with my Toyota here in Winnipeg (we have 4 Toyota dealerships), I do go to my original dealer for any service work. Still, I like the fact that I have options. However, there’s only one Acura dealership in all of Winnipeg! So if, for whatever reason, I’m not satisfied with the level of service I’m stuck. Non Warranty Service Work Also let’s not forget that there’s a bulk of work required every year that is *not* covered under warranty – oil changes, tire rotations, brake pads, etc. I expect I’ll need to get new tires at the 5 years mark as well, which can easily be $1200 – $1500 (I just paid $1000 for new tires for the Rav4 and we’re at the 5 year mark). Now these aren’t going to be *new* costs that I’m not used to from our existing vehicles, but they should still be factored in. I’d budget $500/year, or $5000 over the 10 years I’ll own the vehicle. Final Assessment So let’s re-assess the true cost of my dream MDX: MSRP                    $62,890 Taxes                       $7,546 Warranty                 $2,500 Finance Charge         $1094 Gas                        $10,000 Service Work            $5000 Grand Total           $89,030 So now I have a better idea of 10 year cost overall, and I’ve identified some concerns with local service availability. And there’s now much more to consider over the original $62,890 price tag. Tying This Back to Technology Solutions The process that we just went through is no different than what organizations do when considering implementing a new system, technology, or technology based solution, within their environments. It’s easy to tout the short term cost savings of particular product/platform/technology in a vacuum. But its when you consider the wider impact that the true cost comes into play. Let’s create a scenario: A company is not happy with its current data reporting suite. An employee suggests moving to an open source solution. The selling points are: - Because its open source its free - The organization would have access to the source code so they could alter it however they wished - It provided features not available with the current reporting suite At first this sounds great to the management and executive, but then they start asking some questions and uncover more information: - The OSS product is built on a technology not used anywhere within the organization - There are no vendors offering product support for the OSS product - The OSS product requires a specific server platform to operate on, one that’s not standard in the organization All of a sudden, the true cost of implementing this solution is starting to become clearer. The company might save money on licensing costs, but their training costs would increase significantly – developers would need to learn how to develop in the technology the OSS solution was built on, IT staff must learn how to set up and maintain a new server platform within their existing infrastructure, and if a problem was found there was no vendor to contact for support. The true cost of implementing a “free” OSS solution is actually spinning up a project to implement it within the organization – no small cost. And that’s just the short-term cost. Now the organization must ensure they maintain trained staff who can make changes to the OSS reporting solution and IT staff that will stay knowledgeable in the new server platform. If those skills are very niche, then higher labour costs could be incurred if those people are hard to find or if trained employees use that knowledge as leverage for higher pay. Maybe a vendor exists that will contract out support, but then there are those costs to consider as well. And let’s not forget end-user training – in our example, anyone that runs reports will need to be trained on how to use the new system. Here’s the Point We still tend to look at software in an “off the shelf” kind of way. It’s very easy to say “oh, this product is better than vendor x’s product – and its free because its OSS!” but the reality is that implementing any new technology within an organization has a cost regardless of the retail price of the product. Training, integration, support – these are real costs that impact an organization and span multiple departments. Whether you’re pitching an improved business process, a new system, or a new technology, you need to consider the bigger picture costs of implementation. What you define as success (in our example, having better reporting functionality) might not be what others define as success if implementing your solution causes them issues. A true enterprise solution needs to consider the entire enterprise.

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – 2 Whitepapers Announced – AlwaysOn Architecture Guide: Building a High Availability and Disaster Recovery Solution

    - by pinaldave
    Understanding AlwaysOn Architecture is extremely important when building a solution with failover clusters and availability groups. Microsoft has just released two very important white papers related to this subject. Both the white papers are written by top experts in industry and have been reviewed by excellent panel of experts. Every time I talk with various organizations who are adopting the SQL Server 2012 they are always excited with the concept of the new feature AlwaysOn. One of the requests I often here is the related to detailed documentations which can help enterprises to build a robust high availability and disaster recovery solution. I believe following two white paper now satisfies the request. AlwaysOn Architecture Guide: Building a High Availability and Disaster Recovery Solution by Using AlwaysOn Availability Groups SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn Availability Groups provides a unified high availability and disaster recovery (HADR) solution. This paper details the key topology requirements of this specific design pattern on important concepts like quorum configuration considerations, steps required to build the environment, and a workflow that shows how to handle a disaster recovery. AlwaysOn Architecture Guide: Building a High Availability and Disaster Recovery Solution by Using Failover Cluster Instances and Availability Groups SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn Failover Cluster Instances (FCI) and AlwaysOn Availability Groups provide a comprehensive high availability and disaster recovery solution. This paper details the key topology requirements of this specific design pattern on important concepts like asymmetric storage considerations, quorum model selection, quorum votes, steps required to build the environment, and a workflow. If you are not going to implement AlwaysOn feature, this two Whitepapers are still a great reference material to review as it will give you complete idea regarding what it takes to implement AlwaysOn architecture and what kind of efforts needed. One should at least bookmark above two white papers for future reference. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Documentation, SQL Download, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQL White Papers, T SQL, Technology Tagged: AlwaysOn

    Read the article

  • Preferred way to render text in OpenGL

    - by dukeofgaming
    Hi, I'm about tu pick up computer graphics once again for an university project. For a previous project I used a library called ftgl that didn't leave me quite satisfied as it felt kind of heavy (I tried all rendering techniques, text rendering didn't scale very well). My question is, is there a good and efficient library for this?, if not, what would be the way to implement fast but nice looking text?. Some intended uses are: Floating object/character labels Dialogues Menus HUD Regards and thanks in advance. EDIT: Preferrably that it can load fonts

    Read the article

  • Why is multithreading often preferred for improving performance?

    - by user1849534
    I have a question, it's about why programmers seems to love concurrency and multi-threaded programs in general. I'm considering 2 main approaches here: an async approach basically based on signals, or just an async approach as called by many papers and languages like the new C# 5.0 for example, and a "companion thread" that manages the policy of your pipeline a concurrent approach or multi-threading approach I will just say that I'm thinking about the hardware here and the worst case scenario, and I have tested this 2 paradigms myself, the async paradigm is a winner at the point that I don't get why people 90% of the time talk about multi-threading when they want to speed up things or make a good use of their resources. I have tested multi-threaded programs and async program on an old machine with an Intel quad-core that doesn't offer a memory controller inside the CPU, the memory is managed entirely by the motherboard, well in this case performances are horrible with a multi-threaded application, even a relatively low number of threads like 3-4-5 can be a problem, the application is unresponsive and is just slow and unpleasant. A good async approach is, on the other hand, probably not faster but it's not worst either, my application just waits for the result and doesn't hangs, it's responsive and there is a much better scaling going on. I have also discovered that a context change in the threading world it's not that cheap in real world scenario, it's in fact quite expensive especially when you have more than 2 threads that need to cycle and swap among each other to be computed. On modern CPUs the situation it's not really that different, the memory controller it's integrated but my point is that an x86 CPUs is basically a serial machine and the memory controller works the same way as with the old machine with an external memory controller on the motherboard. The context switch is still a relevant cost in my application and the fact that the memory controller it's integrated or that the newer CPU have more than 2 core it's not bargain for me. For what i have experienced the concurrent approach is good in theory but not that good in practice, with the memory model imposed by the hardware, it's hard to make a good use of this paradigm, also it introduces a lot of issues ranging from the use of my data structures to the join of multiple threads. Also both paradigms do not offer any security abut when the task or the job will be done in a certain point in time, making them really similar from a functional point of view. According to the X86 memory model, why the majority of people suggest to use concurrency with C++ and not just an async approach ? Also why not considering the worst case scenario of a computer where the context switch is probably more expensive than the computation itself ?

    Read the article

  • Preferred lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Centralizing a resource file among multiple projects in one solution (C#/WPF)

    - by MarkPearl
    One of the challenges one faces when doing multi language support in WPF is when one has several projects in one solution (i.e. a business layer & ui layer) and you want multi language support. Typically each solution would have a resource file – meaning if you have 3 projects in a solution you will have 3 resource files.   For me this isn’t an ideal solution, as you normally want to send the resource files to a translator and the more resource files you have, the more fragmented the dictionary will be and the more complicated it will be for the translator. This can easily be overcome by creating a single project that just holds your translation resources and then exposing it to the other projects as a reference as explained in the following steps. Step 1 Step 1 -  Add a class library to your solution that will contain just the resource files. Your solution will now have an additional project as illustrated below. Step 2 Reference this project to the other projects. Step 3 Move all the resources from the other resource files to the translation projects resource file. Step 4 Set the translations projects resource files access modifier to public. Step 5 Reference all other projects to use the translation resource file instead of their local resource file. To do this in xaml you would need to expose the project as a namespace at the top of the xaml file… note that the example below is for a project called MaxCutLanguages – you need to put the correct project name in its place.   xmlns:MaxCutLanguages="clr-namespace:MaxCutLanguages;assembly=MaxCutLanguages"   And then in the actual xaml you need to replace any text with a reference to the resource file. <TextBlock Text="{x:Static MaxCutLanguages:Properties.Resources.HelloWorld}"/> End Result You can now delete all the resource files in the other projects as you now have one centralized resource file.

    Read the article

  • Sandbox solutions seem to be too severely crippled.

    - by Vaccano
    I am learning SharePoint and the different kind of solutions you can deploy. From the training I am watching it seems like you should try your best to use a Sandbox Solution when ever possible. This is because Farm Solutions can mess things up too much. However, two of the main things I would do with WebParts are not supported in Sandbox Solutions. Those are Visual WebParts and WebPart communication. (The first is not allowed because it needs to hit the file system and the second is disallowed because it uses reflection). It seems to me that my WebParts will always want to do at least one of those things. (WebParts that don't communicate are not really that modular are they?) Am I missing the point or are Sandbox Solutions a "nice idea" that are not really used in actual code?

    Read the article

  • Multidimensional multiple-choice knapsack problem: find a feasible solution

    - by Onheiron
    My assignment is to use local search heuristics to solve the Multidimensional multiple-choice knapsack problem, but to do so I first need to find a feasible solution to start with. Here is an example problem with what I tried so far. Problem R1 R2 R3 RESOUCES : 8 8 8 GROUPS: G1: 11.0 3 2 2 12.0 1 1 3 G2: 20.0 1 1 3 5.0 2 3 2 G3: 10.0 2 2 3 30.0 1 1 3 Sorting strategies To find a starting feasible solution for my local search I decided to ignore maximization of gains and just try to fit the resources requirements. I decided to sort the choices (strategies) in each group by comparing their "distance" from the multidimensional space origin, thus calculating SQRT(R1^2 + R2^2 + ... + RN^2). I felt like this was a keen solution as it somehow privileged those choices with resouce usages closer to each other (e.g. R1:2 R2:2 R3:2 < R1:1 R2:2 R3:3) even if the total sum is the same. Doing so and selecting the best choice from each group proved sufficent to find a feasible solution for many[30] different benchmark problems, but of course I knew it was just luck. So I came up with the problem presented above which sorts like this: R1 R2 R3 RESOUCES : 8 8 8 GROUPS: G1: 12.0 1 1 3 < select this 11.0 3 2 2 G2: 20.0 1 1 3 < select this 5.0 2 3 2 G3: 30.0 1 1 3 < select this 10.0 2 2 3 And it is not feasible because the resources consmption is R1:3, R2:3, R3:9. The easy solution is to pick one of the second best choices in group 1 or 2, so I'll need some kind of iteration (local search[?]) to find the starting feasible solution for my local search solution. Here are the options I came up with Option 1: iterate choices I tried to find a way to iterate all the choices with a specific order, something like G1 G2 G3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 ... believeng that feasible solutions won't be that far away from the unfeasible one I start with and thus the number of iterations will keep quite low. Does this make any sense? If yes, how can I iterate the choices (grouped combinations) of each group keeping "as near as possibile" to the previous iteration? Option 2: Change the comparation term I tried to think how to find a better variable to sort the choices on. I thought at a measure of how "precious" a resource is based on supply and demand, so that an higer demand of a more precious resource will push you down the list, but this didn't help at all. Also I thought there probably isn't gonna be such a comparsion variable which assures me a feasible solution at first strike. I there such a variable? If not, is there a better sorting criteria anyways? Option 3: implement any known sub-optimal fast solving algorithm Unfortunately I could not find any of such algorithms online. Any suggestion?

    Read the article

  • How to know whether to create a general system or to hack a solution

    - by Andy K
    I'm new to coding , learning it since last year actually. One of my worst habits is the following: Often I'm trying to create a solution that is too big , too complex and doesn't achieve what needs to be achieved, when a hacky kludge can make the fit. One last example was the following (see paste bin link below) http://pastebin.com/WzR3zsLn After explaining my issue, one nice person at stackoverflow came with this solution instead http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25304170/update-a-field-by-removing-quarter-or-removing-month When should I keep my code simple and when should I create a 'big', general solution? I feel stupid sometimes for building something so big, so awkward, just to solve a simple problem. It did not occur to me that there would be an easier solution. Any tips are welcomed. Best

    Read the article

  • Oracle Introduces Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite for Mission-Critical Environments

    - by uwes
    On 28th of September Oracle announced the Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite. Designed, tuned, tested and fully documented, the Oracle Optimized Solution for Oracle E-Business Suite is based on Oracle SPARC SuperCluster T4-4, Oracle Solaris and Oracle VM Server for SPARC, and is ideal for customers looking to modernize their mission-critical Oracle E-Business Suite environments, lower operating expenses and maximize user productivity. For more details read ... Oracle Press release Oracle Optimized Solutions Solution Brief: Modernize Global Oracle E-Business Suite Environments SPARC SuperCluster

    Read the article

  • Oracle Outsourced Repair Solution: The “Control Tower” for the Reverse Supply Chain

    - by John Murphy
    By Hannes Sandmeier, Vice President of cMRO and Depot Repair Development Smart businesses are increasing their focus on core competencies and aggressively cutting costs in their supply chains. Outsourcing repairs can enable a business to focus on what they do best and most profitably while delivering top-notch customer service through partners that specialize in reverse logistics and repair. A well managed “virtual service organization” can deliver fast turn times, lower costs and high customer satisfaction. A poorly managed partner network can deliver disaster for your business. Managing a virtual service organization requires accurate, real-time information and collaboration tools that enable smart, informed and immediate corrective action. To meet this need, Oracle has released the Oracle Outsourced Repair Solution to provide the “control tower” for managing outsourced reverse supply chain operations from customer complaint through remediation to partner claim settlement. The new solution provides real-time visibility to return status, location, turn time, discrepancies and partner performance. Additionally, its web portals allow partners and carriers to view assigned work, request parts, enter data, capture time and submit claims. Leveraging the combined power of Oracle E-Business Suite and Oracle E-Business Suite Extensions for Oracle Endeca, the Oracle Outsourced Repair Solution provides a comprehensive set of tools that range from quick online partner registration to partner claim reconciliation, from capturing parts and labor to Oracle Cost Management and Financials integration, and from part requisition to waste and hazmat controls. These tools empower service operations managers to: · Increase customer satisfaction Ensure customers are satisfied by holding partners accountable for the speed and quality of repairs, and taking immediate corrective action when things go wrong · Reduce costs: Remove waste from the repair process using accurate job cost and cost breakdown data · Increase return velocity: Users have the tools to view all orders in flight and immediately know the current location, status, owner and contact point for repairs so as to be able to remove bottlenecks, resolve discrepancies and manage escalations The Oracle Outsourced Repair Solution further demonstrates Oracle’s commitment to helping supply chain professionals and service managers deliver high customer satisfaction at the lowest cost. For more information on the Oracle Outsourced Repair Solution, visit here. 

    Read the article

  • Information Builders lance WebFocus Mobile BI, sa solution BI pour Smarphones et tablettes

    Information Builders lance WebFocus Mobile BI Sa solution BI pour Smarphones et tablettes Information Builders annonce le lancement de WebFOCUS Mobile BI, sa nouvelle solution de Business Intelligence qui permet de bénéficier des fonctionnalités analytiques sur mobiles via n'importe quel terminal, application mobile ou navigateur. La solution utilise les rapports WebFOCUS Active Technology en les optimisant pour les rendre compatibles avec tous les types de smartphone tels que l'iPhone, les téléphones sous Android, les Blackberry et les tablettes. Les rapports Active Technology permettent aux utilisateurs de manipuler et d'analyser les informations métiers sur leurs terminaux mobi...

    Read the article

  • Webmarketing : Adobe complète sa solution d'optimisation de l'expérience client avec des modules pour les campagnes mobiles

    Adobe met à jour sa solution d'optimisation de l'expérience client Avec des modules pour les campagnes mobiles et l'intégration avec Adobe Online Marketing Suite Adobe annonce la disponibilité de sa nouvelle solution de gestion de l'expérience web (WEM : Web Experience Management), une avancée qualifié de « majeure » par l'éditeur pour sa plate-forme CEM (gestion de l'expérience client). WEM vise à optimiser la manière dont les entreprises créent des expériences multicanal au profit des ventes, des services et des interactions avec le client. La solution permet aux entreprises de tirer parti des derniers terminaux mobiles et des communautés « pour développer leur potenti...

    Read the article

  • BPM Solution Catalogue–promote your process templates

    - by JuergenKress
    Oracle’s BPM Solution Catalogue showcasing our solutions with partners is now live. Take a look at the initial entries here. We are planning to use this catalogue not only to publish and highlight successful BPM implementations but also will be running campaigns in industry verticals with your solutions. If you have delivered a successful implementation in BPM and think it could be reused and applied again in a similar scenario in the same industry or in a similar environment, then we are keen to know about it and will add it to the solution catalogue. The solution catalogue will showcase successful BPM solutions both inside and outside Oracle. Be in touch with us on this via this e-mail id and we will make sure to add your solution. For more information you can also read the article “Leading-Edge BPM Benefits Without Bleeding-Edge Pain” SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit  www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Technorati Tags: BPM,Solution Catalogue,process templates,BPM Suite,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >