This post confused me way to much. Nothing seemed to make sense, and the only thing I could focus on was the extremely odd name Dataflex.
What about the name….
A quick online search shows that the name is already in use. Not only is it in use, but it is used by a competitive product offering low-code development! How on earth is it even possible to miss out on this?
This sounds like a whole new SkyDrive – OneDrive problem, so I’m going to wait a bit before I rebrand everything to Dataflex
The voice of reason
My mind has been twisting and turning to understand the reasoning of it all of this, and luckily we have Jukka. His post is what Microsoft should have posted originally. It explains everything I was wondering about….. Except the name 😂
Microsoft released a new way to do automatic record creation a few months ago, but I never got around to ckeck it out before now.
The most obvious reason for the new release is creating something that is possible use within new UI. Therefore you can only find this in the customer service app at the moment.
At the current moment the new approach doesn’t work, for a contact that is known by the system with an account. I am working with support help them understand the error with the flow. Will update the post when they fix the error. This means that the new solution only works when the contact is not connected to a parent account.
In the “old” days we created everything via settings in the navigation. You start off creating a new record and link it to a queue you want to listen to. I prefered the following setup, and I have explained why in my other post regarding Customer Service
When you created the role for creation of case, it would use the following standard setup. Notice that the contact here would be set if account and contact were known. Contact would be contact, and account would be customer.
The new way of doing things is a lot like the old, but there are some differences.
Don’t get fooled by the name in queue to monitor. This is a regular email queue, but I gave it the name “flow”. The first thing we have to create is a new rule for the queue.
Here is where we see the first major difference. The condition for creation seems to use the same visuals as the new advanced find.
At the bottom you choose the rule and click create. This brings you over to Microsoft flow. Instead of the old WF, MS autocreares a new flow for you.
Just like the old flow, Microsoft didn’t want to you touch the details of the flow.
The old flow filled out the contact and customer fields, while the new one for some reason doesn’t (yet). I will try to work with MS on this also.
What to do next?
I honestly don’t know when they expect all of these rules to be transfered over, but I guess it will have to be done in the future when they try to sunset the old WorkFlows.
In the meanwhile I hope they fix the flow, so that it works as expected:)
I know that change online is imminent, and is continuous. I don’t mind this, but i do mind how it’s done. I would never have noticed this if I had not created a new demo. It is a little annoying that the functionality introduced can’t be put to use in my existing environment.
This rant is just because I like to keep things vanilla as long as possible. The changes we see here make it even more clear that the platform where I work every day still is an open platform, and not at all a product. If certain things would act more like a product the changes would apply to everyone, and behave the same way. There will always be pro’s and con’s for Platform VS Product..
Not sure when it happened, but the 1 form App for Outlook configuration has now become 2.
Form 1: App for Outlook Contact Card
Form 2: App for Outlook Contact Quick View – NEW
Why does this matter?
I am not sure yet, and that is the problem. Why split them up in the first place? Another extremely interesting thing about the new form is magic in the background that we can’t manipulate or recreate.
The new CASE subgrid looks like this
Not sure what this name means, but its obviously something they have defined after converting the old forms to the new forms.
Lets have a look why this is wierd:
The following picture is in a new untouched demo. The subgrids should have: Account Name Next Activity (Subgrid) Last Activity (Subgrid) Opportunity (Subgrid) – Showing Case (Subgrid)
But as you can see, it only shows content where content is present. If I add a case to the contact Thomas Outlook, it will dynamically show cases in App for Outlook.
This is a great feature, so why am I complaining about it? Well, i can’t reproduce it. That’s why!
This is the same setup in config, but Cases are constantly showing here. I tried every step in config to recreate the function, but no luck..
I even tried importing a UN-managed and Managed solution from the vanilla environment to my existing production without any luck.
Did I not get the memo on this change by any chance? 🙂
2 tables stand out, and they are both tables that I can’t do anything about. RibbonClientMetadataBase WebResourceBase
I can’t control the content of these tables, but they are above 3GB! I personally don’t feel it is reasonable that these tables are included in the storage count. If you feel the same way, please help vote this up:)
So why am I fussing about it now? Well, after all these years Microsoft is still using the Potential Customer field for Field Service.
The error (Accound with id Does not Exist)
Did you ever see this message in Field Service?
As you can see from the image above, the Potential Customer has been set to a Contact.
Standard behaviour is that Account should overwrite the contact, and therefore always show account if account is present. Sometimes this doesn’t happen, and then you will receive the following error when trying to convert to Work Order.
The fix is extremely simple. Dear Microsoft, please just read from the Account field😊
If you for some reason feel the same about this, I created a suggestion for improvement..
In Norway we have a saying “everything was better before”. It’s commonly used to describe what old people feel when things are just moving to fast, and they don’t see the purpose of the change.
The new timeline for Unified Interface has been like this for me, BUT recently things are starting to get better:)
2 tasks and 2 phone calls created. Et was easy to see what type of records these were on the left side with the icon. It was also easy to see that they were not yet completed on the right side, AND that they were white.
When completing one of each I saw clearly that it was completed both with color, and the fact that the complete button was gone.
Another great feature about this was the possability to navigate (hyperlink) to the item by clicking on the phone call or task icon. Worked like a charm.
At last you had a nice feature for quick create that was really nice. The only problem though is that this was never a form we could edit, so in the big picture of things I understand why this was not continued.
So the new timeline has been through a few changes, and this is the lates on wave 2 at the time of writing. They have allready made some small improvements that make it better, but lets break it down.
I have the same 2 tasks and phone call. On the left side I now see orange with my name. I don’t know why my name is there. Would make more sense to have the ICON of the activity type. My name should be sown in FULL as is. In a large company you have no idea who TS is.
On the right side it looks like the task is done.. Well, it isn’t.
When you hover over a task you see the color difference, and this is the first time you actually see the button for complete and open. The “check” mark is complete task, but the odd one here is the open record next to the trash can. Why is it so hard to open a record suddenly? This is absolutely not intuitive, but I guess they just need feeback on this.
The picture below look like the one above, right? Well, in this picture I have actually completed the to phone calls. Can you tell? Nope.. A little odd to leave out the color coding for the visuals. This should be something they could fix in a small release soon i guess.
I love the new UI because of more activities shown in less space, but they still need to understand how people use the timeline. If you really want to make sense of the timeline you need to clearly see what is todo, overdue and complete. Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense really.
Will they ever give us the option to stop the email warnings? (i mean completely gone)
Power Platform is maturing rapidly, and users are really loving the new platform for citizen development. The only natural thing to do for Microsoft was to alter the licensing model now that they see how users are working with the platform.
Normally I am the first one to hate on all changes, but this time I am not sure I hate it. I am actually seeing some opportunities here that I didn’t see before.
I am seeing this from a Dynamics perspective, and not Office. There are 2 different ways of viewing this change.
From what I read, we can now setup a 10$ pr user pr month and create a sales app with both Model Driven and Canvas AND Portal. Within the app we are also capable to run as many flows as we want without the need for a FLOW plan.
You might still need one Enterprise or Proessional license in the bottom for the entities to be installed on the CDS, but after that you can create your own simple apps.
NB! I am sure that Microsoft will introduce some other restrictions later on to separate the apps (Sales, Customer Service etc), but currently this is not the case.