Settings and activity
10 results found
-
336 votes
SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
126 votesSmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
commented
It would be nice to be able to have an admin account that was not a tech and didn't attract a tech license fee. As an alternative, it would be nice for the admin to be able to have a filter so that only specific customers were shown when the filter was active similar to what can be done to assign customers to other techs.
-
59 votes
Hello, Thanks so much for submitting your idea! It’s currently under review by our product team, and should a decision be reached to develop it, we’ll keep you in the loop!
SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
29 votesSmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
22 votesSmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
432 votesSmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
1,426 votes
Hello, Thanks so much for submitting your idea! It’s currently under review by our product team, and should a decision be reached to develop it, we’ll keep you in the loop!
SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
Nice! The feature you requested is being considered for development. We’ll keep an eye on the number of votes, and let you know if a decision is reached to implement. Thank you for being a partner in our process!
SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
70 votes
Nice! The feature you requested is being considered for development. We’ll keep an eye on the number of votes, and let you know if a decision is reached to implement. Thank you for being a partner in our process!
An error occurred while saving the comment SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
commented
Although I do agree it is essential, it will open up a big can of worms and expose problems with the Atera data structure. I'll provide one simple example here but there are many others. When you create a ticket (#1012) and you work on Workstation #1 for the contact bob@acme.com and then subsequently create another ticket (#1013) to work on Server #1 for bob@acme.com, the computer (Agent) you worked on in the first ticket (Workstation #1) will be changed to Server #1 that you worked on in the second ticket. The Agent follows the user so that unrelated tickets are changing the agent in other tickets as you are working.
I really do need bob@acme.com to be a contact for more than one Company and have upvoted this. People have been asking for this for several years. ***BUT*** the way it is now, if we do this, my ticket working on Workstation #1 over at Wonder Pool Cleaning is now going to show that I worked on FrontCounter #4 over at the Ford dealer ship if the next thing bob@acme.com asks me to work on is at Ford instead of Wonder.
I'll leave it at that but if you think about the way this is currently designed and expand your thoughts a bit into billing and auditability of the work records and other considerations many of us have to deal with, I think you will see that any simple solution to let us do this will be opening one giant can of worms in many, many ways.
Like most development, if you get the data structure right at the foundation level, things are just magically possible as your user base helps you move forward. If you don't, it is almost inevitable that you will need to make foundational changes and do data conversions to a live system with a lot of legacy information recorded in it.
SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
-
274 votesSmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment SmarterDesk Tech (ProtoLogic)
commented
A SIMPLE STOPGAP
One simple stop gap measure that would not require a lot of work on Ateras' part but would facilitate some sort of reasonable billing using any billing package would be to modify an existing report to produce a document that could easily be attached to an invoice to provide detail.If you look at the Time Sheet report (Reports|Profitability|Timesheet) it might be a good starting point for a useful report for billing by removing most of the columns (or setting up a check list to include or exclude them but I would advocate just removing them to get to something useful very quickly).
Columns:
Keep - Ticket ID
Discard - Customer Name (It appears in the title)
Discard - Contract Name
Keep ??? - Technician Name
Keep - Title (and allow far more width on the report)
Discard - Resolved Date
Discard - Resolved
Discard - Billable
Discard - Invoiced
Discard - Taxable (to keep it simple and not need to get into the individual time entries)
Keep - Hours
Optional Keep - Rate
Optional Keep - Amount (Hours x Rate)
Keep the time entries that appear below the ticket summary.You could put more time into the design and make it even nicer but I suspect Atera could take this report pretty much as it is and create a much more useful report to be attached to billing as a PDF with very little effort - likely less than an hour. PDF in landscape if necessary to avoid needing to do a lot of reformat work.
Again, this suggestion is to get to something useful with almost no work on Ateras' part so we can get something quickly. I'll include a link to an example produced by editing the Atera Timesheet:
HTTPS is becoming essential.
When we set up for HTTPS we loose the branding.
What used to be portal.ourcompany.com becomes ourcompany.servicedesk.atera.com
At the very least it would be good to remove the Atera branding from the URL and replace it with something generic.
It is an approach other providers have used as an interim step to providing multi domain certificates.