Michael

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael shared this idea  · 
  2. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael shared this idea  · 
  3. 25 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael supported this idea  · 
  4. 37 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael supported this idea  · 
  5. 239 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    54 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We were prepping to start this and realized the narrow-scope version we were willing to commit to would just make most people upset that we “built it half way” – but we aren’t in a position to compete with docusign/etc and spend a year building a proper solution.

    We could more easily help make a zapier/webmerge solution work if you wanted some automation, if we get a lot of feedback supporting that idea I’ll make it happen pretty quickly.

    Michael supported this idea  · 
  6. 45 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael supported this idea  · 
  7. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael shared this idea  · 
  8. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael supported this idea  · 
    Michael commented  · 

    Was about to make a ticket for this, but it might be more constructive to add more to this one.

    Appointment Types visible in calendar view (ie: In Shop - [IS], On-site - [OS], Remote - [RM])

    My first few weeks working with the software I assumed that was already a function and that [RS] stood for Remote Service.

    This would provide a quick view of the type of job being performed, and allow someone scheduling an appointment for another tech to differentiate between jobs; a simple phone call, a Remote Service performed from a desk in the shop, or an On-Site where travel times and equipment availability need to be considered.

    A simple form of this might look like the [RS] tag that we currently have on all events.
    2 pm - 3 pm [OS] Bob's Grub Shack - New Printer
    4 pm - 5 pm [RS] Tony - Outlook password wrong

  9. 40 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    10 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Michael supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base