To the Sugar Team:

[chrisky]

Is sugarCRM meant to be used by single individual end users?

According to SugarCRM.com, sugarcrm is NOT designed nor meant to be used by such..

Let me explain a little futher.... Nowhere on SugarCRM.com is available for sale the purchase of a single [users] license.
Not two, not three, and not even 4, but rather, a MINIMUM purchase of 5 user licenses.


Don't get me wrong, I am not in any way even suggesting to offer for sale single user licenses, that is unless you were to develope some standalone edition of sugarcrm not dependant upon a 'server environment' (utilizing things such as MySQL, PHP, Webserver, etc.).

I agree with your actions in regards to sugarcrm.com and the purchase options for SugarCRM; however, I don't understand the contradicting actions of trying to 'help' single individual end users whom [imho] shouldn't be using it, just as a homeless person off a street corner should not be performing heart surgery on somebody.

By contradicting actions I'm referring to (though it is very nice to see the Sugar Team being more involved with the community) things such as 'packaging' Sugar in an 'easy' to install package for Windows; or Sugar Team members attempting to help said type of users..

It doesn't make sense to me, especially to spend time helping/assisting (reading forum posts, researching specific info neccessary for a reply, typing up a reply, etc.) 'users' whom will never pay you.. Not because they don't want to or aren't satisfied enough with the product in order to purchase it, but because you refuse to sell the product to them...

Anyways, I'm not looking for a response [from Sugar] personnally, rather just wanted to share a thought to the community.

[tdp]

I think you're a touch off base here. First off, it is pretty easy to run SugarCRM in a stand-alone mode. I've got MySQL, PHP and Apache running on my laptop so that when I'm not connected to a network, I can still access information stored in Sugar.

I don't understand the contradicting actions of trying to 'help' single individual end users whom [imho] shouldn't be using it, just as a homeless person off a street corner should not be performing heart surgery on somebody.

What? You don't think that companies with fewer than 5 people have the need for something like Sugar? I'm part of a two-person company and our customer contacts are key to our survival. We need to be able to launch marketing campaigns and manage meeting notes and information. We need to have a shared calendar and be able to track appointments and calls. Sounds like we need a CRM to me.

By contradicting actions I'm referring to (though it is very nice to see the Sugar Team being more involved with the community) things such as 'packaging' Sugar in an 'easy' to install package for Windows; or Sugar Team members attempting to help said type of users..

I see this as a key to SugarCRM's growth. I would bet a lot of small companies either don't have someone technically literate enought to maintain Sugar or simply are too busy to take the time to do so. And in case you've forgotten, big companies are grown from small companies. Heck, HP was once two people in a garage.

t doesn't make sense to me, especially to spend time helping/assisting (reading forum posts, researching specific info neccessary for a reply, typing up a reply, etc.) 'users' whom will never pay you.. Not because they don't want to or aren't satisfied enough with the product in order to purchase it, but because you refuse to sell the product to them...

It is called marketing. Word of mouth. Most companies aren't going to invest in an enterprise-wide piece of software without kicking the tires a bit. Besides, the code in the OS version is also used in the PRO and Enterprise versions, so more users equals more customer responses to usability concerns and bugs. Customer feedback is critical to the success of any product, so it is reasonable to view the OS version as an investment in understanding users, not a cost.

Now with that said, the five license minimum is a pretty boneheaded decision in my opinion. In the case of my company, it does prevent us from buying licenses since the majority of them would go to waste (however given the fiasco called 4.5, I'm seriously reconsidering if we should be using SugarCRM at all). It's not like there is some huge cost associated with issuing a licesne that means Sugar needs to sell five licenses before they make money, or if there is, Sugar needs to take a look at their cost structure.


I'm not trying to pick a fight here, but the only bit of your letter I agree with is that the 5 user minimum should be dropped.

[chrisky]

Good morning my friend...

Let me mention that I discussed pieces of this puzzle in other & previous posts of mine, thus those that haven't read those posts might have a little harder time following the point I was trying to raise with the community, and specifically with users such as yourself..

I completely agree with you that not only yourself, but many small businesses or individuals need a CRM, and that is the cruxe of post(s)...

The majority of activity on this forum is centered around the "it's broken, how do I fix it? Please help me" theme..
If you don't want a flat tire on the freeway, then don't be driving down the freeway with bald tires... eh? lol

I'm of the opinion, that for numerous reasons many users/people/organizations should not be using sugar..
(at least not at this point in time, but hopefully later down the road, at a later developement stage which is hopefully in the very near future).


And, I think you misinterpreted my post in regards to Sugars licensing options.. I agree with the 5 user license minimum, at least as of this day, and can't publicly talk further on this right now.

Despite whether or not everybody agrees with me, lol, I am right in my opinion that even if one is lucky enough to just get Sugar installed and running stablely, the bugs and shortcomings (lack of feature(s) or abilities) alone still result in a CRM system which for the most part is useless to that person(s) because it fails to meet/satisfy the user(s) needs.

But I'm glad to hear that Sugar is a perfect and ready to use out of the box CRM solution for you and your small organization..

This is all that matters, and is why I've gone so far as to emphasize and tell others to scratch Sugar and go purchase a copy of Act or GM, (both of which I dislike for reasons, though such reasons don't neccessarily apply to others) in which I know would [more than likely] meet there needs.. This whole point/theme I shared in a previous post and you can search for that post and read it, if you would like more explanation on this detail.

Good to hear that YOU won't be posting questions such as:
"It don't work!"
"How do I fix this ______"?
"How do {I maintain/troubleshoot/repair server environment related things such as MySql, PHP, Apache, etc}?"
and similarly related posts in which others are screaming "HELP ME" with time passing by in which they're [deprived of] lacking a functional, useable, or effective CRM.
or is that an incorrect interpretation of your post by myself?

Sugar is damn close {to having the perfect and world best CRM}, but wil only reach that goal/destination by staying focused and on the same road opposed to veering off onto a different road going in another direction...

I.E. If you wanna visit Mexico, you need to stay on I-5 and keep going.. Heading east on the 10 for example ... well....You'll never reach mexico if you veer off I-5..

The Sugar Team veered off course a long time ago, (before even myself personally was familiar with Sugar let alone used or tried it), I'm just curious as to when if ever, they will get back on course..

Or maybe I should get off my lazy duff, give up my peacefully (sp?) paced beach life in Encinitas and 'get out' (as one forum member {of whom was right btw} emphasized), and spend 3 or 4 days up north helping them... or maybe not..

Anyways, it's good for Sugar to hear from users such as yourself whom are dissapointed at being unable to pay for & buy SugarCRM..

[chrisky]

It is called marketing. Word of mouth. Most companies aren't going to invest in an enterprise-wide piece of software without kicking the tires a bit. Besides, the code in the OS version is also used in the PRO and Enterprise versions, so more users equals more customer responses to usability concerns and bugs. Customer feedback is critical to the success of any product, so it is reasonable to view the OS version as an investment in understanding users, not a cost.

Now with that said, the five license minimum is a pretty boneheaded decision in my opinion. In the case of my company, it does prevent us from buying licenses since the majority of them would go to waste (however given the fiasco called 4.5, I'm seriously reconsidering if we should be using SugarCRM at all). It's not like there is some huge cost associated with issuing a licesne that means Sugar needs to sell five licenses before they make money, or if there is, Sugar needs to take a look at their cost structure.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, but the only bit of your letter I agree with is that the 5 user minimum should be dropped.

I'm not gonna explain my marketing experience or background, but rather share my favorite lil 'story' that I first came up with about 12 years ago..

"Say you open up a music store, or restaurant, whatever it may be... You have 5 tapes total for sale in the entire store, if a music store, or a menu with only one item if a restaurant.. You can advertise all you want and bring as many people into your store or restaurant as humanly possible, but they'll likely be too satisfied nor return.. You've shot yourself in the foot..

How so? Well, say later down the road, you then stock your music store full with thousands of tapes, or your resturant with not only an immense menu, but an all-you-can-eat buffet bar with a selection beyond imagination.. You could then advertise these wonderful business strengths; however, most if not all that previously visited your business won't return. Instead 'you've burned your bridge' with those customers.. In their minds, they patronized your business in response to your marketing 'our business is the greatest, come do business with us' theme marketing (foundational theme of any and all marketing) to only be essentially lied to and dissapointed..

Now those customers will not believe any further marketing nor take the time to come in again, instead, they'll assume it to be a lie because when they did believe it the first time and came in, they were gravely let down and dissapointed.."

You don't have to agree with me, rather I would hope that you prove me wrong, and do so with action...
If your organization can use sugar as a reasonably effective crm solution for you guys, while NOT experiencing {and/or posting requests for help} bugs or shortcomings of which cause Sugar to essentially be unusable or inneffecitve, then and only then, will you have proven me wrong...

But if instead you should prove me right, well, it's not my loss... It's obviously not Sugar's loss (financially that is, since you can't even purchsae it if you wanted)... It's only your loss.. Your loss of using an effective CRM.. How much money, business, and/or potentional profit will you have lost over the months or years of [supposedly] using while complaining about [having an nonfunctional or ineffective] Sugar?

Sadly, the above {complaining} is all the I really see for the most part on the forum, but whats worse is just how closed minded many are.. It was examplifed to me, the mindset of many, and truthfully, I can't understand it nor people for that matter.. Just the topic of linux vs. windows alone was a great one for me, and without rehashing that debate, people don't want solutions, they want problems, they live for and thive on problems, okay, I'll forego some psychology of humanity.. If a person refuses to spend $10 and a few minutes signing up for some webhosting in order to successfully install and run Sugar, ........................., enough said and they should go cry somewhere else..

[chrisky]

Quick note tdp, you are a friend of which I respect considerably..
Actually yourself can relate and understand alot better than many others..

Between these two previous posts of yours and mine, sum it all up, in which we're both dead on accurate..

You know, the Sugar development team ought to print that out in big, bold letters and hang it in a prominent place. You have described my experience with Sugar EXACTLY. Don't get me wrong, I like using Sugar, but I loathe maintaing it. I guess what pisses me off the most is that Sugar obviously encourages a development community, yet I was forced to stop using most 3rd party stuff because the upgrades to Sugar itself either nuked those add-ons or the add-ons rendered the upgrade impossible.

We've gone through so much trouble with upgrades to date, that we run from them rather than embrace them.. The few fixes or feature improvements offered by an upgrade are usually outweighed by the new bugs or problems the upgrade introduces..

As if working with a single upgrade doesn't scare me, working with many upgrades terrifies me, and at least with my luck, I'd end up with a final installation that had more problems that humanly possible to fix..

And for us, just running sugar is PAINFUL....
Guess we get what we pay for.. lol

[tdp]

I agree with you that SugarCRM has dropped the ball when it comes to software quality and the situation with 3rd party add-ons is atrocious. Whosever approved the last 4.5 patch needs some remedial training in software QA procedures. But starting threads about how SugarCRM isn't suitable for single users, or rambling on about awful it is that these forums have people asking for help only dilutes the message and allows Sugar to ignore the valuable insight your giving them about the pitffalls of living with SugarCRM on a daily basis.

If you have a problem with the software, lets stick to that message. It is the more effective approach.

[chrisky]

I'm sorry we disagree..

We both agree on the need and importance of a CRM in this time of age..
Agreeing on the need and importance of a functioning CRM, when I often read a users post complaining about sugar being essentially useless and begging for help to thus result in an useable and effective CRM for themselves....

You can ignore their cries for help, lack the solution(s) to their problems, OR spend your entire life just TRYING to provide them the help and support in attempt to result in a reasonably effective & useable CRM for them..

And, I'll occasionally respond with my reply "If you want something that's gonna work for you, now, today, etc.. Scratch sugar for now, and go spend $100-200 and buy a copy of Act or Goldmine".

I think you're alot smarter than many, and you are very technically minded just as myself and a good handful of other forum members. You clearly can recognize and agree with my findings & opinions on Sugar's considerable number of problems and/or shortcomings..

I'm sorry that my telling some people that sugar isn't for them and shouldn't be used by them, offends you.

I don't think your method of just complaining about a bug or problem to sugar or here on the forum is a more effective approach. This approach has been going on for years, and hasn't improved the situation one bit..

Kinda like the Iraq war (3 yrs), or the U.S. war against drugs (30 years), with both those examples, billions of dollars, many lifes lost, etc. etc. And realistically, neither have had any impact or improvement.. Nevermind, it would take weeks to lay out this case.. I'll try to stick to sugar..

But keeping it simple... I'm not even touching on the topic of sugars bugs or how we should go about getting them resolved, etc.. With just touching on one single issue, one simple thing, and that is a person/organization being in need of a USEABLE and effective CRM.

In regards to that single issue, what's your 'more effective' solution?

I've already shared my solution, and it is exactly that for many, a solution...
"Just go down to yer local software store and buy a copy of Act or GM"

Many out there, don't want bug after bug in Sugar, fixed over the next century....................
What many/most out there WANT/need, is a fully useable and effective CRM right now, TODAY..

What do you propose to those people out there??

I haven't seen any posts from you giving all those people [crying for a badly needed CRM implementation] a solution.. But I have seen you try and help others resolve a bug here and there, and that is muchly appreciated by the community, but that is NOT a solution for the majority of users out there, instead such are essentially only of value to the minority of us technical users (admins, coders, developers, etc).

As for Sugar, they've more than dropped the ball.. Frankly, they are, and you can quote me on this, "self-sabotagizing" themselves.. And I'm not saying that in a derogotory manner to put them down, but rather I'm saying that with sadness and in dissapointment.

Your 'more effective' solution doesn't provide any solution to those many out there in need of a [useable & effective] CRM.

Your 'more effective' solution doesn't provide any solution apparently hasn't worked to date with the Sugar Team, because it's been not months but YEARS now, and not only have they still failed to complete the 'foundation' (explanation another day maybe) for Sugar, but just in regards to bugs, all they really do is replace one with another.

And this isn't a 'fight' as you termed earlier..
Rather, we're getting one another to think and that is where solutions come from (assuming such thoughts are acted upon).
Keep it coming my friend.. Hopefully we can open one anothers eyes to some new thoughts & perspectives, even if we may not agree on something..

[tdp]

I'm sorry we disagree..

I haven't seen any posts from you giving all those people [crying for a badly needed CRM implementation] a solution.. But I have seen you try and help others resolve a bug here and there, and that is muchly appreciated by the community, but that is NOT a solution for the majority of users out there, instead such are essentially only of value to the minority of us technical users (admins, coders, developers, etc).
.

Well forgive me for providing the help I can.