In a message dated 98-06-20 23:36:36 EDT, you write:
I do not believe that in order for an advanced course to be useful, it must customized. The principals are the same no matter what environment you are in.
I would agree with this sentiment for the User courses. However, there is a definite place for customized designer courses. In the current environment, where the training database is MS Access, no effort is spent in understanding the SQL language. When a student leaves the class, he or she has an understanding of the different features of the Designer product and how to create a universe. But, as evidenced by a number of questions that occur on this list, there is a definite need for additional database specific knowledge.
In the “Old Days” (Business Objects 3.x) the equivalent to the current Designer class was database specific. In other words, if you were going to use Oracle as your target database, we covered Oracle SQL in the Designer class. If you were going to use Sybase, then Sybase SQL was covered. Why?
Because the better you knew your target database SQL, the better your objects could be. And the better your objects, the better your universe. Being database specific also allowed us to cover issues such as outer joins that have different restrictions depending on the target database… outer joins are not covered adequately in the current Designer course. It also allowed us to cover database specific functions, such as Decode() for Oracle, or charindex() and replicate() and so on for Sybase. In Informix we actually taught how to create and use additional database functions as the standard Informix set is fairly small.
There is a whole series of tricks using the sign() function that we used to cover… none of this is available in the standard Designer class at this time.
Unfortunately the target audience for this type of class is much smaller than that for user training. Also, the person that does the training must not only know Business Objects inside and out, but know a variety of database languages / feature sets inside and out. That type of person can be difficult to find! For that reason I suspect that we won’t see this type of training offered as formal classes by BusinessObjects.
On the other hand, I hear that the training materials are being updated. We have not had a chance to review the new material as of yet. The new Designer class is listed as being a two day course, so perhaps they have addressed some of these issues.
At our company we have toyed with the idea of creating Advanced Designer classes to fill this gap. Since we already had created database specific training material for the 3.x classes, it would not have been too difficult. We have not done so for a variety of reasons… the main one being that it would be difficult to sell for the reasons listed above. (We are, after all, a business. We need to sell our products!)
One solution that we offer is an on-site “mentoring” session, either one-to- one or one-to-many with the universe designer(s). We then can spend time talking about the target database, and cover specific design issues based on their data model.
As I said before, I agree with Robert in that customized user training is not always required. There is a benefit to creating training that does use the user’s own data instead of Island Resorts, but the main features of the Business Object user module are the same no matter what. That is, of course, one of the main selling points of the product! But on the training for the Designer product there is a void that can be filled. We will have to wait and see what the new training material provides.
Regards,
Dave Rathbun
Integra Solutions
www.islink.com See you in Orlando in '98!
Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)