TAM Version 10.5 ...... Don't Do IT

[Lori]

I just received this from an Agency Principal in our group.

If you have not gone to 10.5 ..... don't it is VERY buggy.  This version is very buggy....kind of like going to a dot 0 upgrade.  The biggest issue is with C/L AUTO, it will duplicate vehicles, and change the vehicle # e.g  veh .001, 002, 004, 005, 006, 006, 006 etc.  Applied has no fix other than for us to fix manually.  Other bugs have been: corrupting the signature files (.pcx)  until you reload them you cannot print certs or apps.   We lost formatting on ~ 30% of form letters, many many many printing errors. 



On the accord 126 (2007/05) it is adding data to the current app.....from who knows where.  This is going to be A LOT of work to fix.



For any TAM generated activity, when we attach a file, the file is being attached with the need "indexing" info, i.e. policy type, policy # this may not affect any of you, depending on how your vendor interfaces with applied...but if you are using connexion you may have any issue.

[Jim Jensen]

From what I saw of the release notes, I had no desire to go to 10.5. Very little to offer US agencies and I did notice some new problems that result. Sounds like they need to forget the changes they made and make a new 10.5 from scratch. It sounds like the new Canadian forms have lots of problems too. Really, really troubling to hear of another very crappy release on the heels of "we're taking it slowly on releases to make sure they are quality releases that don't cause problems."

[Steven Strauss]

Wow, thanks for the warning; such information is greatly appreciated. Due to the cert issue, this was something we were looking to fast track.

[GeorgeW]

Wonder what version they upgraded from?  We are currently on 10.4 and have no plans at this point to load 10.5 Waiting for 10.6 to see what that brings!

[Jan Regnier]

Ok.....so HOW are they (AS) testing this stuff before it goes out?  It seems like we hear this just about everytime an update is done.....Isn't Beta testing supposed to weed out these issues?   Granted not every issue will affect every agency but MOST agencies have comml clients with autos! 

Don't "they" understand we would LOVE to have only one upgrade/update every few years if it was just a "PERFECT" upgrade/update. - no bugs, no issues, ( or very, very, very, very minor things) - gosh - how many years have we asked them not to BREAK things that work with a new update.  I can see if it happens to something that may not be used by most agencies and would be hard pressed to see it in Beta testing - but - CAutos is a pretty commonly used area!  That should have been glowing like Rudolph's nose!

[Bloody Jack Kidd]

I like patches... I prefer patches... I mean some of the applications running on - well let's say the AU server might be something like Apache 2.0.63.1_09 - and I'm happy when 2.0.63.1_14 comes out and addresses a small flaw in mod_rewrite.  I don't need the whole application reworked, just fix the problem or make a small improvement in some area.

I mean, address the little issues, PMRs whatever and release patches.  You can still have major releases, or service packs or patch roll-ups on occasion, but I tell you, small fixes are the way to go.

[Hans Manhave]

I like patches... I prefer patches... I mean some of the applications running on - well let's say the AU server might be something like Apache 2.0.63.1_09 - and I'm happy when 2.0.63.1_14 comes out and addresses a small flaw in mod_rewrite.  I don't need the whole application reworked, just fix the problem or make a small improvement in some area.

I mean, address the little issues, PMRs whatever and release patches.  You can still have major releases, or service packs or patch roll-ups on occasion, but I tell you, small fixes are the way to go.

Yep, I have one piece of generally available software that claimed to be able to do something.  I tried to do that certain something and it failed.  I let the general user base know.  The owner of the company immediately jumped on it and I had a fix to test within 24 hours.  I tested and it worked but still needed improvement at a different level.  Today, a week later, I have the patch to correct it completely.  When these people release their quarterly or sooner update, it lists the actually end-user description of the problem to indicate exactly what was corrected.  I could go on and mention companies that provide the toolkits for free to make your program interface with their program.

[Lance Bateman]

I "think", regardless of the official line from Applied (Kellner) - any testing they do internally is only on what they think is being done with their system, and only on what modules they think they have touched.  The problem (and I've been a Project Manager at programming firm) is that unless they have and pay attention to a complete version control program that includes a reference to all program modules that include or touch any of the variables or functions in the one they work on - they posibly aren't checking those when they "check" a program module in.

And don't get me started on the totally inadequate error handling routines.

[Bloody Jack Kidd]

Subversion anyone?

[Ian Blundell]

I'm on 10.5 (up from 10.4) and there aren't any new bugs that I'm aware of.  We are a beta tester but don't check features/workflows that we don't use.

We aren't jumping through hoops or doing any special workflows updating apps or anything.  Most of the people here didn't even notice that we went from 10.4 to 10.5 - most of the features invloved Canadian forms.  The certs issue (allowing use of outdated ACORD forms didn't affect us since our procedures call for the latest version to be used always.

[Lori]

We are on 10.4 with no issues. The agency that had the issues that I originally posted are really going to be hurting now with all the manual hours it will take to fix what 10.5 broke.

[Jan Regnier]

I'm on 10.5 (up from 10.4) and there aren't any new bugs that I'm aware of.  We are a beta tester but don't check features/workflows that we don't use.

We aren't jumping through hoops or doing any special workflows updating apps or anything.  Most of the people here didn't even notice that we went from 10.4 to 10.5 - most of the features invloved Canadian forms.  The certs issue (allowing use of outdated ACORD forms didn't affect us since our procedures call for the latest version to be used always.

Ian - you don't have the CAuto issue?

[GeorgeW]

We have "multiple" agencies and branches in TAM and because of the problem with Certificates printing the first agency regardless of whether or not it was the correct agency was going to be a huge problem.

We have both TAM and TAMonline. I see Applied has a fix for this as they are applying it this coming Sunday to TAMOnline.

[Mark Rowe]

I like patches... I prefer patches...

Patches imply that something is broken and we wouldn't want to imply that.

I have always believed that doing away with the patch system was a big mistake. I remember reading about Agency's struggling with the issues in the 9.xx series that weren't fixed until the next "upgrade". There...doesn't upgrade sound much better?

[Judy Means]

I hate to read this.  We're on 8.5 and need to upgrade.  Now that I have all the equipment done, I'm ready to do the software. 

So in essence, what is being said is to upgrade no further than 10.4 right now? 

I've missed the patches too.  If a problem is really really bad, they should release patches.  Some of their bugs could wind up costing an agency a lawsuit if the bug is very critical. 

I would like to see them pause in their "upgrades" and work specifically on 10.5 until they have it nearly bug free.

Judy

[Ray Alvarez]

We upgraded to 10.5 almost 2 weeks ago and we only had 1 problem.  That is, if you use the certificate prefills, you have to go back in and fix them or instead of prefilling the certificate information from the actual policy, it just writes "GENERAL POLICY" in the named insured field and fills in nothing else.  After that, everything, including the signature placement has worked fine.  We use form letters quite extensively with many, many calculations (IFs) and nobody has reported any problem.  While I do love to complain, I have nothing to complain about yet.

[Ian Blundell]

I'm on 10.5 (up from 10.4) and there aren't any new bugs that I'm aware of.  We are a beta tester but don't check features/workflows that we don't use.

We aren't jumping through hoops or doing any special workflows updating apps or anything.  Most of the people here didn't even notice that we went from 10.4 to 10.5 - most of the features invloved Canadian forms.  The certs issue (allowing use of outdated ACORD forms didn't affect us since our procedures call for the latest version to be used always.

Ian - you don't have the CAuto issue?

No issues that we have come across.

[Judy Means]

We're 90% commercial.  If those BAP schedules got mixed up, the CSR's would literally kill me. 

I need to update from 8.5 now that I have our hardware all up to date.  Maybe I'll go to 10.4. 


Judy

[Jeff Golas]

PCX files?? Really? Is it still 1985??

[Lance Bateman]

We're 90% commercial.  If those BAP schedules got mixed up, the CSR's would literally kill me. 

I need to update from 8.5 now that I have our hardware all up to date.  Maybe I'll go to 10.4. 


Judy

Maybe conservative (what a label to apply to me???), but I have always taken the approach of not being on the leading edge of the releases since they started being so buggy (after 7.x), let others find the problems.  I'd agree 10.4 is the release to go to at this point.

[GeorgeW]

Not sure how big your agency is and how many accounting people you might have entering Journal Entries, but they are a problem on 10.4  If more than one person is entering JE's then only one of them will work, the other's lose their entry. A pain for us as we have a large accounting dept. in multiple offices.  This problem is supposed to be fixed on 10.5

We're 90% commercial.  If those BAP schedules got mixed up, the CSR's would literally kill me. 

I need to update from 8.5 now that I have our hardware all up to date.  Maybe I'll go to 10.4. 


Judy

[Judy Means]

George, 

We have about 25 employees, but I'm the only accounting person.   I do have some "helpers"  but I do all the journal entries. 

Thanks for the info.  I could use a real assistant, but I don't have that much I could turn over to keep one busy all day long, so I manage with the part time helper. 

Judy

[KenH]

Yesterday, I logged into Applied to download update fora an agency that wanted to go from 10.3 to 10.4 to get the updated Certs.  10.4 WAS NOT an option only 10.5. 

[Judy Means]

I wonder if you can ask for it particularly. 



Judy

[Charlie Charbonneau]

I looked for 10.4 at the beginning of the month and it was already gone... 10.5 was there but not 10.4... I guess if you snooze you lose...

[KenH]

I went ahead and installed 10.5 last night, and things were very smooth today.  This is not a very heavy user of TAM, but I still have my finger's crossed.

[Billy Welsh]

I like patches... I prefer patches... I mean some of the applications running on - well let's say the AU server might be something like Apache 2.0.63.1_09 - and I'm happy when 2.0.63.1_14 comes out and addresses a small flaw in mod_rewrite.  I don't need the whole application reworked, just fix the problem or make a small improvement in some area.

I mean, address the little issues, PMRs whatever and release patches.  You can still have major releases, or service packs or patch roll-ups on occasion, but I tell you, small fixes are the way to go.

Am I the only one who received the e-mail from AS with the 10.5 "Maintenance Update" (i.e., a PATCH!!!)?

[brinkerdana]

They did the "patch" on TAMOnline last Sunday.

[Judy Means]

What did the patch repair? 



Judy

[Coral]

Printing with the correct agency, if you had more than one in the system.