Surely LS can see that this is a very convoluted and time consuming method to fix a simple mistake.
Lay-bys and service deposits confuse the heck out of my staff.
I think what Lightspeed needs to do is give a random person a basic run through on the software and then tell them to do things like laybys. Then that person can tell them where things aren't intuitive.
The secret of good software is that is is easy and intuitive.
If my retail staff need to think like a computer developer, it means the software developer has failed.
This is completely unacceptable service. Get the coders to figure out a way to keep the communication open to the printer at all times--period. For all the money we are paying, this should be a basic fix that should have been resolved a long time ago. We are busy running our business out here and the last thing we should have to do is become temporary employees of Lightspeed to compensate for their lack of planning and to resolve their own problems. Please improve your product!
@emacgee @caskmusic : Thank you for adding to the list of deficiencies! You addressed many of points that I have discovered as the days go by . . . It’s so disappointing
It’s remarkable how such simple tasks in Onsite require twice (if not more) steps in Retail. Everything takes so much longer. It’s a really hard pill to swallow when you migrate to something far less superior. Onsite wasn’t broken and honestly, I cannot understand how they thought this would be an acceptable system for their Onsite users to migrate to. I would have imagined that before they killed Onsite they would have done their best to ensure that some of the very basic functionality of Onsite was possible in Retail. So after 3 weeks of using Retail, my verdict is in, I find Lightspeed guilty on all charges in the death of Onsite.
I was such an on site fan. It’s hard to believe they built the same system.
I'll jump in on this one as our company also recently had to migrate to LSR from OnSite and have been very very disappointed as well by the reduction in usability and functionality. It feels like moving into a POS designed for very simple businesses, with very simple inventory selections, and that enjoy having one and only one way of doing anything. We learned OnSite and all of its capabilities very well and were able to create a very dynamic and useful POS. Retail has almost none of these capabilities and obligates you to single track options/resolutions for almost everything.
There are more issues and I may add them as I think of/run into them. This is just to say that the reduction in capabilities makes this POS system feel like it's incomplete or designed for simpler operations with less retail experience.
+1 for we need trackers. It was SUCH a useful feature in On-Site.
+1 for re-arranging line items...PO's, invoices, quotes, etc.
+10000 for greater parity of features between LSR and LS OS.
10: Quotes no longer have images as with on-site: ie: no way to send a product range, that dosn't just look like an impersonal request for money.
11: No parking
12: didn't notice number 4 WT
13: Purchase orders don't have Product codes, only uses descriptions
14: no ageing on statements, and is lightweight in function, Go to check out...
We were one of the first in the world with the original Webstore in 2008.
lightspeed + web store = disaster. Almost ruined us
lightspeed + Magento = disaster.
lightspeed onsite + ecom = excellent ( except for the initial URL slaughter)
Light speed retail - ecom = useless*
*if you run accounts or need to send product ranges to customers. If your cash and carry, fine... just .
Retail is a once over lightly, it has no relation to the power of onsite.
I'm still using onsite, my web store is a mess, if the ecom becomes stand alone it can't be re synced to retail, but it's of no use with retail as its feed.
And no, I don't want to get quote machine for better invoicing and catalogues price list, I've already had it, with onsite.
And yes, some features are better
NUMBER 4 IS A SHOCKER, DID I SAY THAT .
Onsite wasn't broken.
@VanessaD Does LightSpeed realize that retailers are not programmers?
This is a significant functionality gap. For larger-scale businesses this simply isn't an efficient workaround. We could have a vendor order for seasonal merchandise. Typically these are ordered up to 6 months in advance and consist of 300-400 SKU's. And the vendor gradually ships us a batch of merchandise at a time. Until close to the target date we need to stock the items in the seasonal collection.
If we are to expect our backoffice fulfillment operators to keep duplicating PO's and keep removing items manually over the course of a few months then I'm not sure of how many of our natives wouldn't be restless. 🙄
This should somehow make its way onto a development roadmap. If Lightspeed is going to land larger-scale customers and occupy a more significant part of the retail software landscape this is definitely a defect. And yes, I realize that some of the manual workarounds could be shortcut via custom API apps or paying for third-party plug-ins. But when it comes to internal areas of the system apart of import/export types of integration it's a slippery slope.