3. 1. Overview
The upgrade assessment provided in this document is focused on giving an initial assessment of the
economics of upgrading the customer project BESIM to Dynamics NAV 2009.
We have split the proposal into 2, a step 1 to get the current application upgraded to NAV 2009 with the
current client and then a step 2 to get the customer updated to RTC.
The financial overview beneath shows that step 1 will be EUR 16.656 and step 2 would be EUR 8.873
Overview of Financial Proposal Step 1
Description EUR
Verification Workshop 960
Check-in and setup 160
Design and Development 12.016
Test, Documentation and Review 1.800
Data conversion 1.720
Total proposal 16.656
Overview of Financial Proposal Step 2
Description EUR
RTC Workshop 960
Design and Development 6.793
Test, Documentation and Review 1.120
Total proposal 8.873
Given that the version that the customer is on is version Dynamics NAV 2.00 AT, which is very old, it is two
step upgrade that we need to do, first from 2.00 to 3.70 and then from 3.70 to NAV 2009 w/o RTC. This will
make the upgrade more expensive, as we have to perform the merge twice.
We believe that our workshops with you and/or the customer might take the price somewhat down, if we can
identify functionality up front that we do not need to upgrade to NAV 2009, a so called clean up discussion.
So the above estimate price can be seen as the worst case scenario.
It is our recommendation to do Step 1 first moving the customer up with current user interface. Step 2 can
be done later, when it is convenient and after we have done a proper analysis of the customers roles, which
we will have more insight in after the first workshop in step 1, as well
From a time-line perspective we would be able to begin the project end April/beginning of May with step 1
concluded by mid/june (see section 11 on project plan).
This proposal is valid for 2 months, but delivery of project on the proposed time plan requires decision by
th
April 6 .
4. 2. The upgrade scenario
The analysis and proposal has been made based on the information and data supplied by:
1 General information (Partner)
1.1 Partner Name MBS - Modern Business Systems
1.2 Contact Person Karl Raab
1.3 E-mail raab@mbs.at
1.4 Phone No. 0043 732 652767 1120
1.5 Project Name Besim
1.6 Requested upgrade finishing date 31.06.2010
1.7 Comments
The analysis is based on upgrading from:
3 Source Database Information
3.1 Database (objects) version AT 2.00
3.2 Database server type (Native/SQL) Native
3.3 Standard localization (list of countries) AT 2.00
3.4 Language modules (list) DEA
3.5 Registered Add-ons (list) and suppliers
3.6 Comments
To:
4 Target Database Information
4.1 Database version NAV 2009 SP1
4.2 Database server type (Native/SQL) SQL
4.3 For Nav 2009 Upgrades: optional
- Should upgrade include upgrade of customized
forms to Role Tailored Client (RTC)
4.4 Standard upgraded localization (list of countries) DEA
4.5 Language modules (list) DEA
4.6 Add-ons to upgrade (list) and suppliers
(New version of add-on will be required)
4.7 Non standard objects to upgrade All
(All/Included to client license/Other)
4.8 Comments
Data migration is based on the provided overview of tables for 1 company.
5. 3. Recommended Methodology
Our upgrade methodology follows the basic steps of the illustration beneath.
Upgrade Upgrade Verification
Information Assessment workshop*
Design/ Quality Assurance
Factory Check-in / Documentation
Development
Implementation
Guideline/ Acceptance
Data Migration workshop
customized
Upgrade Toolkit
Given that number of versions that needs to be upgraded, but also that the customizations are more that 5%
“touch” on standard objects and finally that there is a language challenge to manage, as the application is in
German, we are recommending a verification workshop as the starting point. This workshop is a 3 day
review of the current customer application with discussion of design proposals. This workshop would be
based on an auto-translated (to English) version of the customer application.
Likewise we would recommend that step 2 starts with a RTC Workshop where the customers roles typically
would be compared with standard roles from Microsoft. Additionally the workshop would define which roles
the customized functionality would need to be attached to.
4. Results of assessment of objects
Through the assessment we have uncovered the following modified objects versus a standard version of
your current database:
Lines of
Modified Modified # of changes New code in
Standard Standard Standard in standard Merge custom new
Objects Objects Objects' % objects Time objects objects
Table 360 102 28,33 308 30,8 73 7.797
Form 543 73 13,44 499 49,9 89 21.667
Report 300 21 7,00 287 20,6 130 68.668
Dataport 6 1 16,67 4 0,4 25 1.620
Codeunit 251 44 17,53 484 40,5 40 8.910
XMLPort 0 0 0,00 0 0 0 0
MenuSuite 0 0 0,00 0 0 0 0
Page 0 0 0,00 0 0 0 0
Total 1.460 241 16,51 1.582 142,2 357 108.662
6. Out of a total of 1.460 standard objects (compared with a standard Dynamics NAV AT 2.00) 241 objects are
modified, equal to 16,5% of the objects. In the modified objects we have counted 1.582 changes (a change
is a number of lines of code that together make up some functionality) that have been implemented.
16,5% of modified standard objects, when compared to the total size of the customer solution (BESIM), is a
high level of touch on standard application. We believe that there might be an opportunity to minimize the
future TCO of the application by moving a large number of the modifications out of the standard objects. This
is not part of this proposal though.
5. Add-ons
There are a couple of add-on applications (not within the standard number series) that we would need to
discuss and evaluate in the verification workshop.
6. RTC Transformation of forms
For the step 2, the type of transformation of forms that we are applying in the proposal is a basic
transformation. It does not contain any additions such as fact boxes, ribbons or data on the information bars.
We will make sure that the pages can execute the code that the forms contain. It can be illustrated by the
picture beneath
More advanced transformation and role design might be agreed on in the RTC Workshop that is part of the
proposal.
7. Data-conversion
Data conversion would be made based on a customized upgrade toolkit. This toolkit could also be used by
MBS to do the data conversion themselve.
8. Detailed Investment Overview
Beneath you will find our detailed financial overview. The total fixed price for the upgrade is <price> . All in
all, it represents <days> days of work.
Detailed investment overview step 1:
7. Sectio Description Estimated Fixed Price
n (hours)
1.0 Verification workshop 24 960
Check-in
Factory Check-in, setup of development environment,
2.0 4 160
check-list control, create factory project plan
Design and Development
3.0 Description of design of solution 16 640
3.1 Object Merge 2.00 --> 3.70 142,2 5.688
3.2 Object Merge 3.70 --> 6.00 142,2 5.688
Documentati
4.1 Checklist Testing (1ClickFactory) 8 320
on and
Test,
4.2 Testing and optimizing code against MS SQL 16 640
4.3 Technical Documentation in objects (in English) 21 840
Dataconv
5.0 Customized Upgrade Toolkits 19 760
ersion
5.1 Test conversion 8 320
5.2 Data conversion 16 640
Total Price 416,4 16.656
MBS might conduct section 5.1 and 5.2 themselves at the customer site.
Detailed investment overview step 2
Sectio Description Estimated Estimated
n (hours) price
1.0 RTC Workshop 24 960
Test, Design and
2.0 Design of roles 16 640
Docum Developme
2.1 Create Pages for custom new forms 29,7 1.187
nt
2.1 Create RDLC layout for custom new reports 87 3.467
2.2 Create XMLPorts for custom new dataports 37,5 1.500
entatio
3.1 Checklist Testing (1ClickFactory) 16 640
3.3 Technical Documentation in objects (in English) 12 480
Total Price 221,8 8.873
The price of the RTC enablement project is an estimate. We would be able to give a better and fixed price
after having the first workshop on the project where we would define the RTC transformation approach with
you.
In addition MBS would probably add some project management time, implementation and training of the
customer and your margin on the above proposals.
9. Hourly rates and payment terms
Hourly rates applied in this proposal are:
8. 1ClickFactory operates with a EUR 40 per hour
All prices are excluding VAT (if applicable), travel and accommodation costs.
As for the payment terms for the project:
1ClickFactory development and documentation is invoiced 30% up front, 50% at the delivery of the
developed solution with documentation and 20% after the user acceptance test
There is a 3 month warranty on the upgrade base from the date of the user acceptance test approval.
10. Project Organization
We would need to have conversation around the project organization and whether the end-customer would
be part of that.
11. Project plan
Given that there are 416 hours of work in step 1, we think that we can, with a workshop start in the
beginning of May, be able to deliver the application for test by mid-june, allowing test of application and test
of the data conversion to happen before the end of June. Step 2 would be something to discuss whether to
do in the fall. A more detailed time plan would be created at that point in time.
12. MBS responsibilities
To ensure proper alignment of responsibilities, the project needs to be a project with interaction and
contribution by MBS as well as 1ClickFactory. Clear handovers for deliverables, minutes of meetings and
clear decisions are part of what will make the project a success. In addition, as described above, a
dedicated project manager from MBS’s side that can support the project. It is also important that the people
involved in the project speak English well.
The high-level resource pull on MBS/Customer organization is described beneath:
1.0 Verification workshop Participation
Check-in
Factory Check-in, setup of development environment,
2.0 No requirement
check-list control, create factory project plan
Design and Development
3.0 Description of design of solution
MBS/Customer Project Manager to
review development either weekly or bi
3.1 Object Merge 2.00 --> 3.70
weekly
3.2 Object Merge 3.70 --> 6.00
Documentati
4.1 Checklist Testing (1ClickFactory)
on and
Approval of documentation
Test,
MBS/Customer to test upgrade before
4.2 Testing and optimizing code against MS SQL
go/live
4.3 Technical Documentation in objects (in English)
Dataconv
5.0 Customized Upgrade Toolkits
ersion
5.1 Test conversion 5.1 and 5.2 can also be performed by
MBS on customer site
5.2 Data conversion
