Search Results

Search found 138 results on 6 pages for 'terry frederick'.

Page 6/6 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 

  • How do I put data from multiple records into different columns?

    - by Bryan
    My two tables are titled analyzed and analyzedCopy3. I'm trying to put information from analyzedCopy3 into multiple columns in analyzed. Sample data from analyzedCopy3: readings_miu_id OriginalCol ColRSSIz 110001366 Frederick Road -108 110001366 Steel Street 110001366 Fifth Ave. 110001508 Steel Street -104 What I want to do is put the top 3 OriginalCol, ColRSSIz combinations into columns that I have in the table analyzed. In analyzed there is only one record for each unique readings_miu_id. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Additional Info: By "top 3 OriginalCol, ColRSSIz combinations" I mean the first 3 combinations with the highest value in the ColRSSIz column. For any readings_miu_id there could be anywhere from 1 row of information to 6 rows of information. So at most I'm only wanting the top 3. If there is less than 3 rows for the readings_miu_id then the other columns need to be blank. Query that generates the table "analyzed": strSql4 = " SELECT readings_miu_id, Count(readings_miu_id) as NumberOfReads, First(PercentSuccessz) as PercentSuccess, First(Readingz)as Reading, First(MIUwindowz) as MIUwindow, First(SNz) as SN, First(Noisez) as Noise, First(RSSIz) as RSSI, First(ColRSSIz) as ColRSSI, First(MIURSSIz) as MIURSSI, First(Col1z) as Col1, First(Col1RSSIz) as Col1RSSI, First(Col2z) as Col2, First(Col2RSSIz) as Col2RSSI, First(Col3z) as Col3, First(Col3RSSIz) as Col3RSSI, First(Firmwarez) as Firmware, First(CFGDatez) as CFGDate, First(FreqCorrz) as FreqCorr, First(Activez) as Active, First(MeterTypez) as MeterType, First(OriginColz) as OriginCol, First(ColIDz) as ColID, First(Ownagez) as Ownage, First(SiteIDz) as SiteID, First(PremIDz) as PremID, First(prem_group1z) as prem_group1, First(prem_group2z) as prem_group2, First(ReadIDz) as ReadID, First(prem_addr1z) as prem_addr1 " & _ "INTO analyzed " & _ "FROM analyzedCopy2 " & _ "GROUP BY readings_miu_id, PremIDz; " DoCmd.SetWarnings False DoCmd.RunSQL strSql4 DoCmd.SetWarnings True

    Read the article

  • Iterating through items of CompositeCollection

    - by Dudu
    Consider the code: ObservableCollection<string> cities = new ObservableCollection<string>(); ObservableCollection<string> states = new ObservableCollection<string>(); ListBox list; cities.Add("Frederick"); cities.Add("Germantown"); cities.Add("Arlington"); cities.Add("Burbank"); cities.Add("Newton"); cities.Add("Watertown"); cities.Add("Pasadena"); states.Add("Maryland"); states.Add("Virginia"); states.Add("California"); states.Add("Nevada"); states.Add("Ohio"); CompositeCollection cmpc = new CompositeCollection(); CollectionContainer cc1 = new CollectionContainer(); cc1.Collection = cities; CollectionContainer cc2 = new CollectionContainer(); cc2.Collection = states; cmpc.Add(cc1); cmpc.Add(cc2); list.ItemsSource = cmpc; foreach(var itm in cmpc ) { // itm is CollectionContainer and there are only two itm’s // I need the strings } While list shows the right data on the GUI I need this data (without referring to the ListBox) and I am not getting it

    Read the article

  • Inequality joins, Asynchronous transformations and Lookups : SSIS

    - by jamiet
    It is pretty much accepted by SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) developers that synchronous transformations are generally quicker than asynchronous transformations (for a description of synchronous and asynchronous transformations go read Asynchronous and synchronous data flow components). Notice I said “generally” and not “always”; there are circumstances where using asynchronous transformations can be beneficial and in this blog post I’ll demonstrate such a scenario, one that is pretty common when building data warehouses. Imagine I have a [Customer] dimension table that manages information about all of my customers as a slowly-changing dimension. If that is a type 2 slowly changing dimension then you will likely have multiple rows per customer in that table. Furthermore you might also have datetime fields that indicate the effective time period of each member record. Here is such a table that contains data for four dimension members {Terry, Max, Henry, Horace}: Notice that we have multiple records per customer and that the [SCDStartDate] of a record is equivalent to the [SCDEndDate] of the record that preceded it (if there was one). (Note that I am on record as saying I am not a fan of this technique of storing an [SCDEndDate] but for the purposes of clarity I have included it here.) Anyway, the idea here is that we will have some incoming data containing [CustomerName] & [EffectiveDate] and we need to use those values to lookup [Customer].[CustomerId]. The logic will be: Lookup a [CustomerId] WHERE [CustomerName]=[CustomerName] AND [SCDStartDate] <= [EffectiveDate] AND [EffectiveDate] <= [SCDEndDate] The conventional approach to this would be to use a full cached lookup but that isn’t an option here because we are using inequality conditions. The obvious next step then is to use a non-cached lookup which enables us to change the SQL statement to use inequality operators: Let’s take a look at the dataflow: Notice these are all synchronous components. This approach works just fine however it does have the limitation that it has to issue a SQL statement against your lookup set for every row thus we can expect the execution time of our dataflow to increase linearly in line with the number of rows in our dataflow; that’s not good. OK, that’s the obvious method. Let’s now look at a different way of achieving this using an asynchronous Merge Join transform coupled with a Conditional Split. I’ve shown it post-execution so that I can include the row counts which help to illustrate what is going on here: Notice that there are more rows output from our Merge Join component than on the input. That is because we are joining on [CustomerName] and, as we know, we have multiple records per [CustomerName] in our lookup set. Notice also that there are two asynchronous components in here (the Sort and the Merge Join). I have embedded a video below that compares the execution times for each of these two methods. The video is just over 8minutes long. View on Vimeo  For those that can’t be bothered watching the video I’ll tell you the results here. The dataflow that used the Lookup transform took 36 seconds whereas the dataflow that used the Merge Join took less than two seconds. An illustration in case it is needed: Pretty conclusive proof that in some scenarios it may be quicker to use an asynchronous component than a synchronous one. Your mileage may of course vary. The scenario outlined here is analogous to performance tuning procedural SQL that uses cursors. It is common to eliminate cursors by converting them to set-based operations and that is effectively what we have done here. Our non-cached lookup is performing a discrete operation for every single row of data, exactly like a cursor does. By eliminating this cursor-in-disguise we have dramatically sped up our dataflow. I hope all of that proves useful. You can download the package that I demonstrated in the video from my SkyDrive at http://cid-550f681dad532637.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/BlogShare/20100514/20100514%20Lookups%20and%20Merge%20Joins.zip Comments are welcome as always. @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • WebCenter Customer Spotlight: Texas Industries, Inc.

    - by me
    Author: Peter Reiser - Social Business Evangelist, Oracle WebCenter  Solution SummaryTexas Industries, Inc. (TXI) is a leading supplier of cement, aggregate, and consumer product building materials for residential, commercial, and public works projects. TXI is based in Dallas and employs around 2,000 employees. The customer had the challenge of decentralized and manual processes for entering 180,000 vendor invoices annually.  Invoice entry was a time- and resource-intensive process that entailed significant personnel requirements. TXI implemented a centralized solution leveraging Oracle WebCenter Imaging, a smart routing solution that enables users to capture invoices electronically with Oracle WebCenter Capture and Oracle WebCenter Forms Recognition to send  the invoices through to Oracle Financials for approvals and processing.  TXI significantly lowered resource needs for payable processing,  increase productivity by 80% and reduce invoice processing cycle times by 84%—from 20 to 30 days to just 3 to 5 days, on average. Company OverviewTexas Industries, Inc. (TXI) is a leading supplier of cement, aggregate, and consumer product building materials for residential, commercial, and public works projects. With operating subsidiaries in six states, TXI is the largest producer of cement in Texas and a major producer in California. TXI is a major supplier of stone, sand, gravel, and expanded shale and clay products, and one of the largest producers of bagged cement and concrete  products in the Southwest. Business ChallengesTXI had the challenge of decentralized and manual processes for entering 180,000 vendor invoices annually.  Invoice entry was a time- and resource-intensive process that entailed significant personnel requirements. Their business objectives were: Increase the efficiency of core business processes, such as invoice processing, to support the organization’s desire to maintain its role as the Southwest’s leader in delivering high-quality, low-cost products to the construction industry Meet the audit and regulatory requirements for achieving Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) compliance Streamline entry of 180,000 invoices annually to accelerate processing, reduce errors, cut invoice storage and routing costs, and increase visibility into payables liabilities Solution DeployedTXI replaced a resource-intensive, paper-based, decentralized process for invoice entry with a centralized solution leveraging Oracle WebCenter Imaging 11g. They worked with the Oracle Partner Keste LLC to develop a smart routing solution that enables users to capture invoices electronically with Oracle WebCenter Capture and then uses Oracle WebCenter Forms Recognition and the Oracle WebCenter Imaging workflow to send the invoices through to Oracle Financials for approvals and processing. Business Results Significantly lowered resource needs for payable processing through centralization and improved efficiency  Enabled the company to process invoices faster and pay bills earlier, allowing it to take advantage of additional vendor discounts Tracked to increase productivity by 80% and reduce invoice processing cycle times by 84%—from 20 to 30 days to just 3 to 5 days, on average Achieved a 25% reduction in paper invoice storage costs now that invoices are captured digitally, and enabled a 50% reduction in shipping costs, as the company no longer has to send paper invoices between headquarters and production facilities for approvals “Entering and manually processing more than 180,000 vendor invoices annually was time and labor intensive. With Oracle Imaging and Process Management, we have automated and centralized invoice entry and processing at our corporate office, improving productivity by 80% and reducing invoice processing cycle times by 84%—a very important efficiency gain.” Terry Marshall, Vice President of Information Services, Texas Industries, Inc. Additional Information TXI Customer Snapshot Oracle WebCenter Content Oracle WebCenter Capture Oracle WebCenter Forms Recognition

    Read the article

  • signalR groups - connecting/disconnecting and sending - am I missing something?

    - by Terry_Brown
    very new to signalR, and have rolled up a very simple app that will take questions for moderation at conferences (felt like a straight forward use case) I have 2 hubs at the moment: - Question (for asking questions) - Speaker (these should receive questions and allow moderation, but that will come later) Solution lives at https://github.com/terrybrown/InterASK After watching a video (by David Fowler/Damian Edwards) (http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Web+Camps+TV/Damian-Edwards-and-David-Fowler-Demonstrate-SignalR) and another that I can't find the URL for atm, I thought I'd go with 'groups' as the concept to keep messages flowing to the right people. I implemented IConnected, IDisconnect as I'd seen in one of the videos, and upon debugging I can see Connect fire (and on reload I can see disconnect fire), but it seems nothing I do adds a person to a group. The signalR documentation suggests "Groups are not persisted on the server so applications are responsible for keeping track of what connections are in what groups so things like group count can be achieved" which I guess is telling me that I need to keep some method (static or otherwise?) of tracking who is in a group? Certainly I don't seem able to send to groups currently, though I have no problem distributing to anyone currently connected to the app and implementing the same JS method (2 machines on the same page). I suspect I'm just missing something - I read a few of the other questions on here, but none of them seem to mention IConnected/IDisconnect, which tells me these are either new (and nobody is using them) or that they're old (and nobody is using them). I know this could be considered a subjective question, though what I'm looking for is just a simple means of managing the groups so that I can do what I want to - send a question from one hub, and have people connected to a different hub receive it - groups felt the cleanest solution for this? Many thanks folks. Terry

    Read the article

  • Problem Displaying XML in Grid View-newbie

    - by Dean
    I am trying to do something in VisualWebDev 2008 Express that I thought would be simple, but it is not working. I want to display data from an XML file so I added the XMLDataSource to my page, pointed it to the XML file, and then added the GridView and connected it to the datasource. I am getting the following error: GridView - GridView1There was an error rendering the control. The data source for GridView with id 'GridView1' did not have any properties or attributes from which to generate columns. Ensure that your data source has content. Could someone please tell me what I might be doing wrong, TIA Dean A smippet from my XML is as follows: 6019 - Renaissance MS - New School Renaissance MS 7155 Hall Road Fairburn, GA 30213 NS-6019200-LA-01 New School Close-out NS-6019200 0.000000000000000e+000 The construction of the new Renaissance MS will be at the intersection of Jones/Hall Road, in the districts 7th & 9F and Land Lots 117, 143 & 146 of Fulton County, GA. The work includes the construction of the 180,500 square foot building that will house 34 standard classrooms, 12 standard science labs, 20 special purpose classrooms, cafeteria and litchen, gymnasium, media center and administrative offices. The site will also have multi-purpose playfields with track, softball field, tennis courts and basketball/volleyball court. Terry O'Brien Parsons Stevens Wilkinson Stang Newdow Barton Malow -84.62242 33.61497

    Read the article

  • Should I learn to code?

    - by saltcod
    Hi All, This is more of a philosophical question than a technical one, but I’d like some opinions on it, and I think that there are many others in my position that would benefit. My issue is that I don’t really have time to learn how to code. I know, I know… no one has time anymore, but please hear me out. Since learning to use Drupal about 2 years ago I’ve been involved with several projects wherein I’ve become the default quasi-developer, front-end designer, site manager, and system administrator. What I’ve found is that I can produce fairly nice, feature rich Drupal sites with the wealth of contrib. modules out there (Views, CCK, image handling, etc….). BUT! I can’t code. I know enough PHP to insert something into a block, or re-word a string, but that’s about it. I still don’t really even know how arrays work. My question Succinctly, my question is: Given the time that I have available for all of this stuff – in addition to a full-time job and regular life – am I better off trying to become more expert at the front-end stuff, or should I just learn PHP already? Pros 1. If a project doesn’t use Drupal, I’ll know enough PHP to be able to participate. 2. Learning PHP would help my Drupal development too 3. Learning PHP would make front-end theming easier 4. Learning PHP should give me that missing background in programming – and should allow me to learn other languages in the future Cons 1. At 28, I know I’m not too old to learn anything. But am I too old to become ‘good’? 2. Am I better off getting better and better at front-end UX work? 3. Am I better off farming out the PHP work? Suggestions from coders welcome! Thanks Terry

    Read the article

  • JSON is not being recognised

    - by richzilla
    Hi All, Im having a bit of trouble getting my JSON to be recognised by my web page. I have validated JSON that im getting returned from server, so i know that is correct, however my javascript function is not doing anything with it. My succes function is as follows: success: function(data) { $('input[name=customer_name]').val(data.name); $('textarea[name=customer_address]').text(data.address); $('input[name=customer_email]').val(data.email); $('input[name=customer_tel]').val(data.tel); $('input[name=user_id]').val(item.id); } Yet the fields are not being repopulated with the data that is returned, if it helps, a sample of my JSON data: { "name": "Terry O'Toole", "address": "Terrys House\nTerry Street\nTerrysville\nTerrytown\nTT1 6TT", "email": "[email protected]", "tel": "05110000000" } Any help would be appreciated. [EDIT] Expanded ajax call: $.ajax({ url: "<?php echo site_url('user/users/ajax'); ?>", type: 'POST', data: {"userid": item.id}, success: function(data) { $('input[name=customer_name]').val(data.name); $('textarea[name=customer_address]').text(data.address); $('input[name=customer_email]').val(data.email); $('input[name=customer_tel]').val(data.tel); $('input[name=user_id]').val(item.id); } }) });

    Read the article

  • getting Internet connection sharing working in a slightly more complicated configuration

    - by tirichitirca t
    I have the following configuration: Computer A - Mac OSX 10.8.4, wireless & wired adapters Computer B - Windows 7 (64 bit), wireless & wired adapters, has internet connection via the wired adapter (ethernet) d-link wired/wireless router. Problem to solve: Connect from computer A to the internet through the wired connection of computer B. I tried the following: I set up a local network between A and B using the d-link router. The configuration is this: D-link router - 192.168.0.1 A - wired connection to the d-link router, static 192.168.0.101 (I could have used the wireless but I preferred the wired connection) B - wireless connection to the d-link router DHCP 192.168.0.102 (but I made sure it always gets the same address) B - wired connection to the internet using some address that begins with 10.x.y.z. In this configuration A can see B. I enabled ICS on the wired adapter of B. I set up the Gateway of A to point to B and DNS servers to point to the DNS servers specified for the 10.x.y.z address. It doesn't work, A goes only as far as B. It can ping the 10.x.y.z address of B though. I then found this article: http://terrybritton.com/windows-internet-connection-sharing-ics-not-working-with-linux-bridging-is-the-solution-916/. Terry is suggesting that a bridge should be defined on B between the two connections. I tried that but basically computer B is screwed as soon as I create the bridge. It can't connect to the internet anymore. It is as if the network bridge seems to think the traffic to the internet should go from the wired connection to the wireless and not the other way around. The other thing that puzzles me is the router itself. In general the router needs an internet address. In a normal configuration it is the router that gets the ip address and the internet traffic goes through the router. In my case I am not interested in that. So, any suggestions to get this working? I wouldn't shy away from using a commercial software but I would think windows 7 should allow me to do it. Thanks

    Read the article

  • CEN/CENELEC Lacks Perspective

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Over the last few months, two of the European Standardization Organizations (ESOs), CEN and CENELEC have circulated an unfortunate position statement distorting the facts around fora and consortia. For the benefit of outsiders to this debate, let's just say that this debate regards whether and how the EU should recognize standards and specifications from certain fora and consortia based on a process evaluating the openness and transparency of such deliverables. The topic is complex, and somewhat confusing even to insiders, but nevertheless crucial to the European economy. As far as I can judge, their positions are not based on facts. This is unfortunate. For the benefit of clarity, here are some of the observations they make: a)"Most consortia are in essence driven by technology companies making hardware and software solutions, by definition very few of the largest ones are European-based". b) "Most consortia lack a European presence, relevant Committees, even those that are often cited as having stronger links with Europe, seem to lack an overall, inclusive set of participants". c) "Recognising specific consortia specifications will not resolve any concrete problems of interoperability for public authorities; interoperability depends on stringing together a range of specifications (from formal global bodies or consortia alike)". d) "Consortia already have the option to have their specifications adopted by the international formal standards bodies and many more exercise this than the two that seem to be campaigning for European recognition. Such specifications can then also be adopted as European standards." e) "Consortium specifications completely lack any process to take due and balanced account of requirements at national level - this is not important for technologies but can be a critical issue when discussing cross-border issues within the EU such as eGovernment, eHealth and so on". f) "The proposed recognition will not lead to standstill on national or European activities, nor to the adoption of the specifications as national standards in the CEN and CENELEC members (usually in their official national languages), nor to withdrawal of conflicting national standards. A big asset of the European standardization system is its coherence and lack of fragmentation." g) "We always miss concrete and specific examples of where consortia referencing are supposed to be helpful." First of all, note that ETSI, the third ESO, did not join the position. The reason is, of course, that ETSI beyond being an ESO, also has a global perspective and, moreover, does consider reality. Secondly, having produced arguments a) to g), CEN/CENELEC has the audacity to call a meeting on Friday 25 February entitled "ICT standardization - improving collaboration in Europe". This sounds very nice, but they have not set the stage for constructive debate. Rather, they demonstrate a striking lack of vision and lack of perspective. I will back this up by three facts, and leave it there. 1. Since the 1980s, global industry fora and consortia, such as IETF, W3C and OASIS have emerged as world-leading ICT standards development organizations with excellent procedures for openness and transparency in all phases of standards development, ex post and ex ante. - Practically no ICT system can be built without using fora and consortia standards (FCS). - Without using FCS, neither the Internet, upon which the EU economy depends, nor EU institutions would operate. - FCS are of high relevance for achieving and promoting interoperability and driving innovation. 2. FCS are complementary to the formally recognized standards organizations including the ESOs. - No work will be taken away from the ESOs should the EU recognize certain FCS. - Each FCS would be evaluated on its merit and on the openness of the process that produced it. ESOs would, with other stakeholders, have a say. - ESOs could potentially educate and assist European stakeholders to engage more actively and constructively with FCS. - ETSI, also an ESO, seems to clearly recognize these facts. 3. Europe and its Member States have a strong voice in several of the most relevant global industry fora and consortia. - W3C: W3C was founded in 1994 by an Englishman, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, in collaboration with CERN, the European research lab. In April 1995, INRIA (Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique) in France became the first European W3C host and in 2003, ERCIM (European Research Consortium in Informatics and Mathematics), also based in France, took over the role of European W3C host from INRIA. Today, W3C has 326 Members, 40% of which are European. Government participation is also strong, and it could be increased - a development that is very much desired by W3C. Current members of the W3C Advisory Board includes Ora Lassila (Nokia) and Charles McCathie Nevile (Opera). Nokia is Finnish company, Opera is a Norwegian company. SAP's Claus von Riegen is an alumni of the same Advisory Board. - OASIS: its membership - 30% of which is European - represents the marketplace, reflecting a balance of providers, user companies, government agencies, and non-profit organizations. In particular, about 15% of OASIS members are governments or universities. Frederick Hirsch from Nokia, Claus von Riegen from SAP AG and Charles-H. Schulz from Ars Aperta are on the Board of Directors. Nokia is a Finnish company, SAP is a German company and Ars Aperta is a French company. The Chairman of the Board is Peter Brown, who is an Independent Consultant, an Austrian citizen AND an official of the European Parliament currently on long-term leave. - IETF: The oversight of its activities is by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), since 2007 chaired by Olaf Kolkman, a Dutch national who lives in Uithoorn, NL. Kolkman is director of NLnet Labs, a foundation chartered to develop open source software and open source standards for the Internet. Other IAB members include Marcelo Bagnulo whose affiliation is the University Carlos III of Madrid, Spain as well as Hannes Tschofenig from Nokia Siemens Networks. Nokia is a Finnish company. Siemens is a German company. Nokia Siemens is a European joint venture. - Member States: At least 17 European Member States have developed Interoperability Frameworks that include FCS, according to the EU-funded National Interoperability Framework Observatory (see list and NIFO web site on IDABC). This also means they actively procure solutions using FCS, reference FCS in their policies and even in laws. Member State reps are free to engage in FCS, and many do. It would be nice if the EU adjusted to this reality. - A huge number of European nationals work in the global IT industry, on European soil or elsewhere, whether in EU registered companies or not. CEN/CENELEC lacks perspective and has engaged in an effort to twist facts that is quite striking from a publicly funded organization. I wish them all possible success with Friday's meeting but I fear all of the most important stakeholders will not be at the table. Not because they do not wish to collaborate, but because they just have been insulted. If they do show up, it would be a gracious move, almost beyond comprehension. While I do not expect CEN/CENELEC to line up perfectly in favor of fora and consortia, I think it would be to their benefit to stick to more palatable observations. Actually, I would suggest an apology, straightening out the facts. This works among friends and it works in an organizational context. Then, we can all move on. Standardization is important. Too important to ignore. Too important to distort. The European economy depends on it. We need CEN/CENELEC. It is an important organization. But CEN/CENELEC needs fora and consortia, too.

    Read the article

  • How to use PredicateBuilder with nested OR conditionals in Linq

    - by tblank
    I've been very happily using PredicateBuilder but until now have only used it for queries with only either concatenated AND statements or OR statements. Now for the first time I need a pair of OR statements nested along with a some AND statements like this: select x from Table1 where a = 1 AND b = 2 AND (z = 1 OR y = 2) Using the documentation from Albahari, I've constructed my expression like this: Expression<Func<TdIncSearchVw, bool>> predicate = PredicateBuilder.True<TdIncSearchVw>(); // for AND Expression<Func<TdIncSearchVw, bool>> innerOrPredicate = PredicateBuilder.False<TdIncSearchVw>(); // for OR innerOrPredicate = innerOrPredicate.Or(i=> i.IncStatusInd.Equals(incStatus)); innerOrPredicate = innerOrPredicate.Or(i=> i.RqmtStatusInd.Equals(incStatus)); predicate = predicate.And(i => i.TmTec.Equals(tecTm)); predicate = predicate.And(i => i.TmsTec.Equals(series)); predicate = predicate.And(i => i.HistoryInd.Equals(historyInd)); predicate.And(innerOrPredicate); var query = repo.GetEnumerable(predicate); This results in SQL that completely ignores the 2 OR phrases. select x from TdIncSearchVw where ((this_."TM_TEC" = :p0 and this_."TMS_TEC" = :p1) and this_."HISTORY_IND" = :p2) If I try using just the OR phrases like: Expression<Func<TdIncSearchVw, bool>> innerOrPredicate = PredicateBuilder.False<TdIncSearchVw>(); // for OR innerOrPredicate = innerOrPredicate.Or(i=> i.IncStatusInd.Equals(incStatus)); innerOrPredicate = innerOrPredicate.Or(i=> i.RqmtStatusInd.Equals(incStatus)); var query = repo.GetEnumerable(innerOrPredicate); I get SQL as expected like: select X from TdIncSearchVw where (IncStatusInd = incStatus OR RqmtStatusInd = incStatus) If I try using just the AND phrases like: predicate = predicate.And(i => i.TmTec.Equals(tecTm)); predicate = predicate.And(i => i.TmsTec.Equals(series)); predicate = predicate.And(i => i.HistoryInd.Equals(historyInd)); var query = repo.GetEnumerable(predicate); I get SQL like: select x from TdIncSearchVw where ((this_."TM_TEC" = :p0 and this_."TMS_TEC" = :p1) and this_."HISTORY_IND" = :p2) which is exactly the same as the first query. It seems like I'm so close it must be something simple that I'm missing. Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong here? Thanks, Terry

    Read the article

  • Internationalization of static pages with Rails

    - by Gavin
    I feel like I'm missing something really simple and I keep spinning my wheels on this problem. I currently have internationalization working throughout my app. The translations work and the routes work perfectly. At least, most of the site works with the exception of the routes to my two static pages, my "About" and "FAQ" pages. Every other link throughout the app points to the proper localized route. For example if I select "french" as my language, links point to the appropriate "(/:locale)/controller(.:format)." However, despite the changes I make throughout the app my links for the "About" and "FAQ" refuse to point to "../fr/static/about" and always point to "/static/about." To make matters stranger, when I run rake routes I see: "GET (/:locale)/static/:permalink(.:format) pages#show {:locale=/en|fr/}" and when I manually type in "../fr/static/about" the page translates perfectly. My Routes file: devise_for :users scope "(:locale)", :locale => /en|fr/ do get 'static/:permalink', :controller => 'pages', :action => 'show' resources :places, only: [:index, :show, :destroy] resources :homes, only: [:index, :show] match '/:locale' => 'places#index' get '/'=>'places#index',:as=>"root" end My ApplicationController: before_filter :set_locale def set_locale I18n.locale=params[:locale]||I18n.default_locale end def default_url_options(options={}) logger.debug "default_url_options is passed options: #{options.inspect}\n" { :locale => I18n.locale } end and My Pages Controller: class PagesController < ApplicationController before_filter :validate_page PAGES = ['about_us', 'faq'] def show render params[:permalink] end def validate_page redirect_to :status => 404 unless PAGES.include?(params[:permalink]) end end I'd be very grateful for any help ... it's just been one of those days. Edit: Thanks to Terry for jogging me to include views. <div class="container-fluid nav-collapse"> <ul class="nav"> <li class="dropdown"> <a href="#" class="dropdown-toggle" data-toggle="dropdown"><%= t(:'navbar.about') %><b class="caret"></b></a> <ul class="dropdown-menu"> <li><%=link_to t(:'navbar.about_us'), "/static/about_us"%></li> <li><%=link_to t(:'navbar.faq'), "/static/faq"%></li> <li><%=link_to t(:'navbar.blog'), '#' %></li> </ul> </li>

    Read the article

  • Understanding the value of Customer Experience & Loyalty for the Telecommunications Industry

    - by raul.goycoolea
    Worried by economic woes and market forces, especially in mature markets, communications service providers (CSPs) increasingly focus on improving customer experience. In fact, it seems difficult to find a major message by a C-level executive in the developed world that does not include something on "meeting and exceeding customers' needs". Frequently in customer satisfaction studies by prominent firms, CSPs fall short of the leadership demonstrated by other industries that take customer-centric approaches to their bottom-line strategies. Consider the following:Despite the continued impact of global economic crisis, in July 2010, Apple Computer posted record revenue and net quarterly profit. Those who attribute the results primarily to the iPhone 4 launch should note that Apple also shipped around 30% more Macintosh computers than the same period the previous year. Even sales of the iPod line increased by 8% in a highly commoditized, shrinking media player market. Finally, Apple began selling iPads during the quarter, with total sales of more than 3 million units. What does Apple have that the others lack? Well, some great products (and services) to be sure, but it also excels at customer service and support, marketing, and distribution, and has one of the strongest brands globally. Its products are useful, simple to use, easy to acquire and augment, high quality, and considered very cool. They also evoke such an emotional response from many of Apple's customers, which they turn up their noses at competitive products.In other words, Apple appears to have mastered virtually every aspect of customer experience and the resultant loyalty of its customer base - even in difficult financial times. Through that unwavering customer focus, Apple continues to drive its revenues and profits to new heights. Other customer loyalty leaders like Wal-Mart, Google, Toyota and Honda are also doing well by focusing on customer experience as an essential driver of profitability. Service providers should note this performance and ask themselves how they might leverage the same principles to increase their own profitability. After all, that is what customer experience and loyalty are all about: profitability.To successfully manage all the critical touch points of customer experience, CSPs must shun the one-size-fits-all approach. They can no longer afford to view customer service fundamentally as an act of altruism - which mentality dates back to the industry's civil service days, when CSPs were typically government organizations that were critical to economic development and public safety.As regulators and public officials have pushed, and continue to push, service providers to new heights of reliability - using incentives and punishments - most CSPs already have some of the fundamental building blocks of customer service in place. Yet despite that history and experience, service providers still lag other industries in providing what is seen as good customer service.As we observed in the TMF's 2009 Insights Research report, Customer Experience Management: Driving Loyalty & Profitability there has been resurgence in interest by CSPs. More and more of them have stated ambitions to catch up other industries, and they are realizing that good customer service is a powerful strategy for increasing business performance and profitability, not an act of good will.CSPs are recognizing the connection between customer experience and profitability, as demonstrated in many studies. For example, according to research by Bain & Company, a 5 percent improvement in customer retention rates can yield as much as a 75 percent increase in profits for companies across a range of industries.After decades of customer experience strategy formulation, Bain partner and business author, Frederick Reichheld, considers "would you recommend us to a friend?" as the ultimate question for a customer. How many times have you or your friends recommended an iPod, iPhone or a Mac? What do your children recommend to their peers? Their peers to them?There are certain steps service providers have to take to create more personalized relationships with their customers, as well as reduce churn and increase profitability, all while becoming leaner and more agile. First, they have to define customer experience, we define it as the result of the sum of observations, perceptions, thoughts and feelings arising from interactions and relationships between customers and their service provider(s). Virtually every customer touch point - whether directly or indirectly linked to service providers and their partners - contributes to customer perception, satisfaction, loyalty, and ultimately profitability. Gaining leadership in customer experience and satisfaction will not be a simple task, as it is affected by virtually every customer-facing aspect of the service provider, and in turn impacts the service provider deeply - especially on the all-important bottom line. The scope of issues affecting customer experience is complex and dynamic.With new services, devices and applications extending the basis of customer experience to domains beyond the direct control of the service provider, it is likely to increase in complexity and dynamism.Customer loyalty = increased profitsAs stated earlier, customer experience programs are not fundamentally altruistic exercises, but a strategic means of improving competitiveness and profitability in the short and long term. Loyalty is essential to deriving long term profits from customers.Some of the earliest loyalty programs date back to the 1930s, when packaged goods companies offered embedded coupons for rewards to buyers, and eventually retail chains began offering reward programs to frequent shoppers. These programs continued for decades but were leapfrogged in the 1980s by more aggressive programs from the airlines.This movement was led by American Airlines, which launched the first full-scale loyalty marketing program of the modern era with the AAdvantage frequent flyer scheme. It was the first to reward frequent fliers with notional air miles that could be accumulated and later redeemed for free travel. Figure 1: Opportunities example of Customer loyalty driven profitOther airlines and travel providers were quick to grasp the incredible value of providing customers with an incentive to use their company exclusively. Within a few years, dozens of travel industry companies launched similar initiatives and now loyalty programs are achieving near-ubiquity in many service industries, especially those in which it is difficult to differentiate offerings by product attributes.The belief is that increased profitability will result from customer retention efforts because:•    The cost of acquisition occurs only at the beginning of a relationship: the longer the relationship, the lower the amortized cost;•    Account maintenance costs decline as a percentage of total costs, or as a percentage of revenue, over the lifetime of the relationship;•    Long term customers tend to be less inclined to switch and less price sensitive which can result in stable unit sales volume and increases in dollar-sales volume;•    Long term customers may initiate word-of-mouth promotions and referrals, which cost the company nothing and arguably are the most effective form of advertising;•    Long-term customers are more likely to buy ancillary products and higher margin supplemental products;•    Long term customers tend to be satisfied with their relationship with the company and are less likely to switch to competitors, making market entry or competitors gaining market share difficult;•    Regular customers tend to be less expensive to service, as they are familiar with the processes involved, require less 'education', and are consistent in their order placement;•    Increased customer retention and loyalty makes the employees' jobs easier and more satisfying. In turn, happy employees feed back into higher customer satisfaction in a virtuous circle. Figure 2: The virtuous circle of customer loyaltyFigure 2 represents a high-level example of a virtuous cycle driven by customer satisfaction and loyalty, depicting how superiority in product and service offerings, as well as strong customer support by competent employees, lead to higher sales and ultimately profitability. As stated above, this is not a new concept, but succeeding with it is difficult. It has eluded many a company driven to achieve profitability goals. Of course, for this circle to be virtuous, the customer relationship(s) must be profitable.Trying to maintain the loyalty of unprofitable customers is not a viable business strategy. It is, therefore, important that marketers can assess the profitability of each customer (or customer segment), and either improve or terminate relationships that are not profitable. This means each customer's 'relationship costs' must be understood and compared to their 'relationship revenue'. Customer lifetime value (CLV) is the most commonly used metric here, as it is generally accepted as a representation of exactly how much each customer is worth in monetary terms, and therefore a determinant of exactly how much a service provider should be willing to spend to acquire or retain that customer.CLV models make several simplifying assumptions and often involve the following inputs:•    Churn rate represents the percentage of customers who end their relationship with a company in a given period;•    Retention rate is calculated by subtracting the churn rate percentage from 100;•    Period/horizon equates to the units of time into which a customer relationship can be divided for analysis. A year is the most commonly used period for this purpose. Customer lifetime value is a multi-period calculation, often projecting three to seven years into the future. In practice, analysis beyond this point is viewed as too speculative to be reliable. The model horizon is the number of periods used in the calculation;•    Periodic revenue is the amount of revenue collected from a customer in a given period (though this is often extended across multiple periods into the future to understand lifetime value), such as usage revenue, revenues anticipated from cross and upselling, and often some weighting for referrals by a loyal customer to others; •    Retention cost describes the amount of money the service provider must spend, in a given period, to retain an existing customer. Again, this is often forecast across multiple periods. Retention costs include customer support, billing, promotional incentives and so on;•    Discount rate means the cost of capital used to discount future revenue from a customer. Discounting is an advanced method used in more sophisticated CLV calculations;•    Profit margin is the projected profit as a percentage of revenue for the period. This may be reflected as a percentage of gross or net profit. Again, this is generally projected across the model horizon to understand lifetime value.A strong focus on managing these inputs can help service providers realize stronger customer relationships and profits, but there are some obstacles to overcome in achieving accurate calculations of CLV, such as the complexity of allocating costs across the customer base. There are many costs that serve all customers which must be properly allocated across the base, and often a simple proportional allocation across the whole base or a segment may not accurately reflect the true cost of serving that customer;  This is made worse by the fragmentation of customer information, which is likely to be across a variety of product or operations groups, and may be difficult to aggregate due to different representations.In addition, there is the complexity of account relationships and structures to take into consideration. Complex account structures may not be understood or properly represented. For example, a profitable customer may have a separate account for a second home or another family member, which may appear to be unprofitable. If the service provider cannot relate the two accounts, CLV is not properly represented and any resultant cancellation of the apparently unprofitable account may result in the customer churning from the profitable one.In summary, if service providers are to realize strong customer relationships and their attendant profits, there must be a very strong focus on data management. This needs to be coupled with analytics that help business managers and those who work in customer-facing functions offer highly personalized solutions to customers, while maintaining profitability for the service provider. It's clear that acquiring new customers is expensive. Advertising costs, campaign management expenses, promotional service pricing and discounting, and equipment subsidies make a serious dent in a new customer's profitability. That is especially true given the rising subsidies for Smartphone users, which service providers hope will result in greater profits from profits from data services profitability in future.  The situation is made worse by falling prices and greater competition in mature markets.Customer acquisition through industry consolidation isn't cheap either. A North American service provider spent about $2,000 per subscriber in its acquisition of a smaller company earlier this year. While this has allowed it to leapfrog to become the largest mobile service provider in the country, it required a total investment of more than $28 billion (including assumption of the acquiree's debt).While many operating cost synergies clearly made this deal more attractive to the acquiring company, this is certainly an expensive way to acquire customers: the cost per subscriber in this case is not out of line with the prices others have paid for acquisitions.While growth by acquisition certainly increases overall revenues, it often creates tremendous challenges for profitability. Organic growth through increased customer loyalty and retention is a more effective driver of profit, as well as a stronger predictor of future profitability. Service providers, especially those in mature markets, are increasingly recognizing this and taking steps toward a creating a more personalized, flexible and satisfying experience for their customers.In summary, the clearest path to profitability for companies in virtually all industries is through customer retention and maximization of lifetime value. Service providers would do well to recognize this and focus attention on profitable customer relationships.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6