Need business case to move to 4.1

Hi all,
We are currently using APEX 3.2, and would like to upgrade. I haven't had much time to look into the features of APEX 4, and now I have been told that I need to put together a business case for upgrading by next week. While some of the new features look great, I have to put this to business users rather than technical people. Can anyone point me to improvements that look good from a business standpoint and any info on the upgrade process?
Thanks for any advice!
John

http://en-us.sysadmins.lv/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=134
HTH
Vadims Podāns, aka PowerShell CryptoGuy
My weblog: en-us.sysadmins.lv
PowerShell PKI Module: pspki.codeplex.com
PowerShell Cmdlet Help Editor pscmdlethelpeditor.codeplex.com
Check out new: SSL Certificate Verifier
Check out new:
PowerShell File Checksum Integrity Verifier tool.

Similar Messages

Need Business case Explaination about the Field in Customer Master

Hi all,
I have a doubt in Customer master Record
1. Customer Group
2. Price Group
3. Price list
4. Customer Stat.group
What I mentioned above fields i need business case explination, but all the above fileds are explaining about the Price and Statistics about the report. By using F1 Help i can understand but i need business case
Is there any link between those fields ?
@ Please dont close the thread if it is basic question please provide the details and link because i serached in Google but i couldn't able to findout

hi
anuradha,
In my knowledge customer pricing group is the main in the customer master ,
you will one test case in customer pricing group in customer u can not fill it, the same customer u can rise the sale order , system sows earorr message, no customer master records maintain, it means when u create the sale order system take pricing procedure , pricing procedure determination ; sales area+customer pricing procedure +document pricing procedure assign to pricing procedure,(ovkk) ,
customer statical group
Sales Organization      0001   Sales Org. 001
Distribution Channel    01
Division                       00
Cust.stats.grp              1      'A' Material
CustGroupMaterial       1      'A' Material
StatGrpSalesDoc         2      Returns, Credit Memo
StatGrpDocumentItm     1      Returns, Credit Memo
Update Group               1      SIS: Sales Document, Delivery, Billing Document
it is the static updating group for item level,
Sales Organization     0001   Sales Org. 001
Distribution Channel    01
Division                        01
Cust.stats.grp             1      'A' Material
StatGrpSalesDoc        1      Order, Debit Memo
Update Group              1      SIS: Sales Document, Delivery, Billing Document
it is for static updating group for header level
it is use full in vov7 ,
price list and price group it is use full pricing to the customers, you can check it sale order header in sale tab u can find your required fields,

Business case to move from Oracle BPM 10.3g to BPM11g

We are a very large organisation doing our business process implementation using Oracle BPM 10.3g. Currently we are working on only 3 processes, but over next couple of years, we would have at least 10 LIVE processes. As an organisation, we are wondering if we should at all move to OBPM 11g or would it be better to move as early as possible.
As I understand, the migration from 10.3g to 11g would not be migration, but re-work of all the processes. Is this correct?
Or does Oracle have plans to come out with BPM 12g that would offer migration features from 10.3g?
Are there any good reasons why a large organisation like ours would benefit by moving to BPM 11g? If yes, what are these reasons?
Are these benefits good enough to scrap 1-2 years effort and BPM knowledge earned while developing solution on BPM 10.3g as BPM 11g looks architecturally quite different from 11g?
Or should our approach be to implement all our processes on 10.3g and then move onto 11g 2-3 years from now if the benefits are not significant?
Regards,
Amit Goswami
Edited by: 874034 on 21-Jul-2011 07:23

Hi.
I'd like to add some comments here that might be useful.
As Mark already said, migration tools will be provided in 12 for transforming 10.3 projects. It is important to note that these tools will facilitate migration but will no accomplish a 100% automated transformation. One quick reason would be the support of BPMN (design and runtime) instead of XPDL. Some XPDL stuff may be represented in different ways in BPMN and you will have to choose which option is better for you.
So what I think is really important for any 10.3 customer is to start knowing and using the new platform. Some of the reasons would be:
- Each BPM project is different. Knowing about 11/12 will help you understand the specific situation of your project.
- Based on the above, you will be in good shape to understand migration procedures and impact as soon as documentation is ready.
- You may find that new processes you have to develop can take advantage of 11g features, so you will have the option of implementing them using the new version.
- Runtime platform may also be different. That will depend on you current environment (standalone for instance) which may be different from 11g. So it's not only about design patterns, but also runtime.
Again, BPM implementation is different, so for some customers it'd be better to wait until 12 to migrate their processes but others can start developing on 11g right now. In order to decide which is the best approach you need to know about the new platform. And Mark also mentioned one huge advantage: you can start with 11gPS4 right now knowing that the experience will help you a lot also for 12.
So my strong suggestion would be to take time to read docs, download the tool and implement some samples. You may even want to prototype some of your existing processes (or the new ones) in the tools and see how it goes.
Another tip I can suggest is to look for 10.3 guidelines to minimize migration. This doc have some suggestions for having an easier migration path in the future but most importantly provides information about how many 10.3 features are going to be 'mapped' into 12g, and I think it's going to be valuable information for you. The current version is quite outdated. Product Management intends to update it for next OOW.
Hope it helps.
Regards,
Gustavo

Need Business Case for iBook and DayTimer Stuff

I'm having a hard time trying to find a case for my iBook that still has room for my 8.5 x 11 Day Timer portfolio that looks, how shall I say, "professional"??? I'm one of those Bible carryin' guys, too. Help, suggestions?

Hi Gebo,
What size do you have? Do you want metal, leather, or other? Do you want a messenger type bag, brief case, or something else? I personally like the:
Targus radius Leather Messenger
Anything by Folee
McKlein V Series Morgan
McKlein I Series River
Jon
G4 1.33Ghz iBook, G4 iMac 1Ghz, G3 500Mhz iBook, Macintosh 128K, eMate... Mac OS X (10.4.5) Airport EX, Moto Razr, iLife '06, SmartDisk 160Gb, Apple BT Mouse, Sight..

Help: Need Project Business case

Kindly provide me with business case that is related to oracle projects track.
Please help me i need urgent help.
This my mail : [email protected]

You should find plenty of useful information here...
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/ebusiness/projects/index.html

Business Case- Need inputs

Hi Experts,
Please let me know what does a business case satnds for in general. I had been asked to prepare a business case for my client and I donot have any clue about this. Would be a real help if any one cen please pass me on soem older templates, samples for this.
Rgds
NS

HI,
The Business Case identifies the objectives and proposed solution of the SAP Program and documents quantifiable benefits that support the Programu2019s justification.
Below mentioned are the contents of a business case at higher level.
1. Executive Summary
     a. Program Objective
     b. Problem Statement/Opportunity
     c. Proposed Solution
     d. Industry Comparison
2. Strategic Alignment
     a. Business Strategy
     b. Technology Strategy
3. Program Benefits
     a. Tangible Benefits
     b. Intangible Benefits
I think sharing the business case of my projects will be difficult because of confidentaility issues. Hope this helps you and you can make your own business case document on these guidelines.
Rgds
Manish

Do i need a CAS server per AD site?

Hi!
So I have been browsing through a lot of Exchange Server documentation, guides and best practice but I have not found (or misunderstanding) the CAS placement for my situation.
We are currently in the process of upgrading to Exchange server 2013. As we have an Exchange 2003 only deployment, we will first need to move to Exchange 2010 and get rid of all the Exchange 2003 servers and then move on to Exchange 2013. We have a
single domain with 21 AD sites. 8 of these sites (Vessels at Sea) are connected by vSat the other 13 of these sites a remote offices with a more stable connection than vSat.
We want to have a MBX server at every site and what I get from the available documentation on the internet I will also need a HUB server per AD site. What I am not sure about is, do I also need a CAS server per site? What I get from this excerpt:
"A new service was introduced with Exchange Server 2010 to allow these MAPI connections to be handled by the Client Access
server. The RPC Client Access service provides data access through a single, common path of the Client Access server, with the exception of public folder requests, which are still made directly to the Mailbox server. This change applies business logic to clients
more consistently, and provides a better client experience when failover occurs." (ref Understanding RPC Client Access.), is that I also
need a CAS server per site.
Can somebody give me any definite insights in this one?
To summarize the question:
In a multi site AD with a MBX server per site, do I also need a CAS server per site?
Your help is much appreciated!
Regards,
Erik

(for Exchange 2010) You need CAS and Hub role in each site where Mailbox role deployed
Understanding Client Access
"You must install the Client Access server role in every Exchange organization and every Active Directory site that has the Mailbox server role installed"
Overview of the Hub Transport Server Role
"You must deploy a Hub Transport server role in each Active Directory site that contains a Mailbox server role"
Blog - Smtp25.ru

Typical business case scenarios for SharePoint 2013 Apps

What are the typical real time business case scenario for 1. SharePoint Hosted apps 2. Auto Hosted apps 3. provider hosted Apps? Why people choose any of this model apps model in comparison to typical On-Premise solution?
Another question comes is when should one go for On-Premise solution rather than Apps? What are real time scenarios?

Let's discuss first whether to develop apps or full trust solution.
Talking about technical aspect, On-Premise solution is popular choice for organizations who have SharePoint hosted on premise (not SharePoint Online). However, if you are using SharePoint Online, there's no choice except Apps (and possibly sandbox but deprecated).
So for SharePoint Online only viable solution is developing apps. However for on-premise you can develop full trust or apps. However since apps requires a bit more configuration and not yet full feature set as you can do with full trust, most people are still
developing full trust solution on premise.
Talking about business requirement at hand, you can develop apps (even in on-premise), if your requirement is really looks like an app. For example, you would like to develop a SharePoint solution, that will show data from SAP inside SharePoint. The solution
mostly nothing to do with SharePoint but calling SAP services to perform stuffs. So you can develop an apps and deploy inside SharePoint. Another example is import CSV files in SharePoint list, you can write an apps. But mostly I think you need to decide whether
to develop apps depends on the Apps API ability. The API is still very limited in features/functionalities. So even if your requirement looks like apps you can't develop apps if the current SharePoint Apps API doesn't support the functionality.
Now let's talk about which apps model you would like to use SharePoint Hosted apps means everything hosted inside SharePoint and no other external infrastructure is required. One example is the CSV file upload apps. However, with SharePoint hosted apps,
you can't use C# rather you just have javascript to develop the apps. There's rumours that auto hosted apps will be deprecated not sure but there's not more conceptual difference apart from where the apps is hosted (both hosted outside SharePoint). Provider/auto-hosted
apps will be running outside SharePoint (i.e., in IIS web site), and communicate to SharePoint through REST or client object model. One provider hosted apps in the office app market is adlib pdf conversion. The apps allows you to select multiple files and
covert them to pdf file. Basically the conversion site is hosted somewhere outside (in the provider's infrastructure). When you select all the files and click 'convert' from ribbon user is redirected to the provider site (different url) and the files are merged
and converted to pdf. Since it's outside of sharepoint, you can use any development language (C#, java, php etc.). The provider hosted app talks to sharepoint through REST or client object model.
So in summary, sharepoint hosted app has less complexity as it doesn't require another infrastructure and runs inside sharepoint. However you are limited to use only javascript to develop your apps. On the other hand with provider hosted apps, you can use
any development language but you need to consider extra level of security/complexity to integrate the app with sharepoint.
Thanks,
Sohel Rana
http://ranaictiu-technicalblog.blogspot.com
Thanks for this nice reply. Plz clarify if only Auto hosted apps will be deprecated or provider hosted apps also may be deprecated by MS?

OSB - Business Case for Adapters Vs Transport

Hi
1. Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc..
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.
Thanks!

Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc.. For DB, you have to use DB adapter in OSB beacuse there is no seprate transport defined for DB. For FILE, you have both options - FILE transport and FILE adapter (in OSB 11g). FILE transport should be the preferred option (never seen documented anywhere) as it has been designed as part of the product and hence should be faster (although never comapred). For JMS and FTP, you have to use respective transports defined in OSB because OSB does not support JCA adapters for FTP/JMS (you may refer - 25.2.1 Adapter Support
at http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E14571_01/doc.1111/e15866/jca.htm#BABBICIA)
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.OSB is a dedicated routing product and must be used for scenarios where only routing is required along with light transformations. Being a stateless product OSB can bear heavy load as well as gives better performance. BPEL can do what OSB does (to a certain extent) but being a statefull product it is much slower than OSB and should be used only for scenarios where process orchestration/human workflow intervention is required.
OSB being a service bus, can mediate among almost each and every kind of protocols but BPEL would need adapters for such mediation.
Regards,
Anuj

How much HD space do I need to create my movie in FCE?

If I create a 20-minute movie in FCE, how much HD space will I need to create the movie and burn to DVD?
I am new to FCE, but when I was using Pinnacle for the PC, Pinnacle would rEnder and write the movie to DVD within the program.
With FCE, I am under the impression I will have to render the movie, then export it to IDVD and burn from there?
Thanks
-Mike

iMovie and Final Cut Express do not burn DVDs. You have to export your work from those applications and import the resulting file(s) into iDVD, DVD Studio Pro or Roxio Toast to build & burn your DVDs.
Regarding hard disk space requirements,
If you have 20 mins of captured DV clips, they will take about 4.3GB of disk space.
If you have a 20 min edited video in FCE and you apply effects, generators or transitions that require rendering, that may take up to another 4.3GB of disk space.
When you export your finished video from FCE, export to QuickTime Movie and UNcheck the option called "Make Movie Self-Contained". That way you will get a QuickTime reference movie that will be rather small, in your case maybe even under 1MB.
When you create & burn your iDVD project, iDVD will use your QuickTime reference movie as input and encode the video to burn it on a DVD. When you save your iDVD project the encoded assets are stored in the project. For a 20 min video, depending on the quality options you select in iDVD, your iDVD project file could be as large as 4.5GB.
So, you should expect to need something like 13GB total space to handle your project from beginning to end.
Of course, if you have more source media, are doing HDV video, do exports from FCE that are Self-Contained, or use iDVD to save DVD images, they will require even more space.

Business case

HI SAP-XI Guru,
can you please discuss some business cases where we
need SAP-XI in real time project.
Thanks & Regards
Krishna

Hello,
For example you want to exchange data between SAP and Database
SAP and Non SAP
In general if you need to communicate between two hetergoneous systems it can be done through middleware (Which is EAI ) and PI is SAP product.
AS Prateek said search in SDN for more
Rajesh

What's the business case for using adobe forms for handling print forms

Hi
We are just starting our SAP project and are looking at the possibility to use Adobe forms for generating and printing our forms, like purchase orders, invoices etc.
My Question is:
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - <i> We have been looking on the SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high</i>
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
Regards
Morten Nielsen

Hi Morten,
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
As far I know SAP is going to stop support for SAPScript in coming years (I don't know exact dates). It is pretty much advisable to use Adobe Print Forms.
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - We have been looking on the
SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high
We can use Adobe Print Forms where ever we can able to use SApscripts/PDF print Forms.
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
It is better to settle with Adobe forms rather than using SAPscript/Smart forms. One of the main reason for this is maintainance is much easier than SAPscript/Smart forms.
But remember that Java Stack need to be installed in order to use Adobe Forms.
Please visit the below SDN area on Adobe forms for more details.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/interactiveforms
Thanks
Ramakrishna
Message was edited by:
Ramakrishna Ramisetti

North American Student Dashboard Challenge – Business Case Questions

Students, post your business case questions for the North American Student Dashboard Challenge here.
Good luck with the challenge!

Two of the KPIs which need to be included in the dashboard are:
1. Income vs Expenses
2. Performance to Budget
There is no income statement in the attached excel files, we are just given statement of cash flow. For individual items under revenue and expense we need an income statement. This is required for designing dashboard for KPI 1.
For KPI 2, the case study asks to display comparison of Actual vs Budget for 4 revenue items - corporate, individual, foundations, and special events - as a chart component. The attached excel files does not have adequate information on this either.
I see only two spreadsheets in the Excel file JA Financial Statements 2006 - 2011 - 1. Statements of Functional Expense; and 2. Statements of Cash Flow - Table.
Please help what needs to be done here. The case study says to refer - Statement of Activites Tab from JA Financial Statements.xls for KPI 1 and KPI 2. However, there is no such spreadsheet on this Excel file. I have downloaded the project data from the following link: http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/uac/index?rid=/library/uuid/30ee1571-2533-2f10-31bd-8826243425ee
Thanks,
Chandan

Support Packs - Business Case

I support the SAP instance at a small SME. We run ECC6 for FICO SD MM & HR (but not payroll or BI). It has been two years since the last support pack update. The support packs are 13 & 15 and HR is on 32, the Kernel for 700_REL is 175.
To build a business case for patching to later releases I need to find where SAP gives a broad description of the support Packs and a description of the improvements made. Am I correct that these shall only include note changes but no enhancements to business processes.
Is the best forum for this question?

> To build a business case for patching to later releases I need to find where SAP gives a broad description of the support Packs and a description of the improvements made. Am I correct that these shall only include note changes but no enhancements to business processes.
Exactly - that's what support packages should be, theoretically. Usually they also contain small improvements or "backports" of newer releases.
I wonder that you were able to run your HR so long without any support package updates, usually HR contains critical legal changes for each country, especially on (fiscal) year changes.
To see what happened between source and target SP level check
http://service.sap.com/sp-stacks
--> SP Stack Download & Side effect report
and
http://service.sap.com/side-effect
Markus

Advice on how to build a business case for partitioning

Hi Everyone,
I'm the architect of a business intelligence/data warehouse team. We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning. Our team is pretty unanimous for partitioning, many of our source system partners also consider it a "no-brainer", however, we're getting push back from our CIO saying that 1.5 TB and 100 million records isn't that much data as compared to other "big data" companies and that it doesn't require partitioning.
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
Thanks for your feedback.
-=Joe

I'm going to be contrarian and start from the end of your post.
>
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
>
Yes - forget about cost-vs-benefit. That's the CIOs job not yours. You're an architect. Stick to architecture. Design and implement the architecture needed to meet the business requirements of your projects. If you are given requirements that can't be met with your current infrastructure then that is when you should propose alternative infrastructure.
>
We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning.
>
NONSENSE! That's what ALL of the above statements represent - UTTER AND ABSOLUTE NONSENSE.
Who cares what you believe? Beliefs don't carry weight, facts do. You do list some facts: 1.5 TB of data, 100 million row counts, wide record lengths, large sorts, long rows, data will get more granular, need to maintain historical data.
Ho Hum! So what? How do ANY of those facts indicate any sort of issue or problem, existing or potential, at all? They don't. You haven't provided information that suggests that ANY of those facts illustrate what Justin referred to as 'pain points'.
Unless those facts prevent you from doing your job of providing an architecture that meets the business requirements you don't have a leg to stand on.
My first reaction to your request would be similar to your cio's. Implicit in your cio's response are some questions you need to ask and answer
1. What is it that you do now that you can't do with the current architecture?
2. What is it that you need to do for an upcoming requirement that you can't do with the current architecture?
3. What alternatives are available to modify the current architecture to do what can't be done in items #1 and #2 above?
That #3 is where my skepticism lies. You seem to have already concluded that partitioning is the answer. Why? What problems do you think it will solve? Why not RAC? Why not a separate data warehouse system? Why not split that historical data off into an OLAP system? Maybe that can reduce the size of the OLTP system to where you won't have whatever problems you are having.
Partitioning is just about addressing some performance issues. A lot of times partitioning is used more for management purposes such as loading/offloading data without impacting those huge tables you are talking about.
If my hot queries use a primary key value to retrieve data it isn't going to matter much if the tables are partitioned or not.
That is what sets the context for what Justin is telling you. You and your team need to document the constraints (and SLAs) your system currently has, how close you are to hitting those constraints, your options for avoiding/evading those constraints using the current infrastructure and the options for avoiding/evading those constraints using a modified architecture.
It is up to the CIO to do the cost-benefit analysis of working within the limits imposed by the current infrastructure versus modifiying the architecture.

Need business case to move to 4.1

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for