Access to OneBox OS clients

[quote] Ihor Susiak The integrator wrote: client confirmed access https://crm-onebox.com/ua/client-access/ yes [file]8319[/file] when logging in wants to use license [file]8320[/file] will access without a license in the OS work for partners? [/quote] no all partners take licenses now

Why is it so hard? Buying licenses from an integrator is somehow not very logical. And why then get access to the partner's box, if you can simply create an administrator and work under him?

[quote] Andrey Sukhanitsky The integrator wrote: Why is it so hard? Buying licenses from an integrator is somehow not very logical. [/quote] Maxim and I think that this is more logical. Because then the partners will use it in their boxes as well. Even employees of SHEBO KTS and others are now eating licenses [quote] Andrey Sukhanitsky The integrator wrote: And why then get access to the partner's box, if you can simply create an administrator and work under him? [/quote] and how do you install the application then? + now the client clearly sees to whom he gave access and how to take it away, and there are no problems with confidentiality

[quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: Maxim and I think that this is more logical. Because then the partners will use it in their boxes as well. Even employees of SHEBO KTS and others are now eating licenses [/quote] I don't understand why it should be limited, the company provides a box with the required number of licenses to the parterre anyway [file]8334[/file] That is, there is no need for free access, only to the client's box, for uninterrupted work, if the project is active and the licenses are purchased there, then it will be quite problematic to perform the settings, you need to wait for someone to leave, contact the client and ask them to release license I understand the logic if any user can request access to any other box, but this can also be bypassed, so that the access request is available only to those who are registered as a partner or are an employee of the partner and prohibit them from requesting access to their boxes, I know , you can :) Please consider returning such a function, it makes work 1000 times easier for partners, especially for those who have more than one employee. Maybe not immediately, a little later,

[quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: and how do you install the application then? + now the client clearly sees to whom he gave access and how to take it away, and there are no problems with confidentiality [/quote] I do not argue against this, let the client give access himself, this is a very cool feature for the client's LK

[quote] Andrey Sukhanitsky The integrator wrote: [quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: Maxim and I think that this is more logical. Because then the partners will use it in their boxes as well. Even employees of SHEBO KTS and others are now eating licenses [/quote] I don't understand why it should be limited, the company provides a box with the required number of licenses to the parterre anyway [file]8334[/file] That is, there is no need for free access, only to the client's box, for uninterrupted work, if the project is active and the licenses are purchased there, then it will be quite problematic to perform the settings, you need to wait for someone to leave, contact the client and ask them to release license I understand the logic if any user can request access to any other box, but this can also be bypassed, so that the access request is available only to those who are registered as a partner or are an employee of the partner and prohibit them from requesting access to their boxes, I know , you can :) Please consider returning such a function, it makes work 1000 times easier for partners, especially for those who have more than one employee. Maybe not immediately, a little later, [/quote] everything is simple - let the client take into account when purchasing that 1 license will be occupied by the integrator and voila)

[quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: everything is simple - let the client take into account when purchasing that 1 license will be occupied by the integrator and voila) [/quote] well, both, however, everything started so well...

I know that in other SRM there is a concept of the type of license: - client's - partnership In fact, Vanbox now only has a client license, in order to implement projects, you need to buy a client license (although I am not a client and will not work in this client's SRM), because the partnership does not exist anymore, and that's sad.

[quote] Korop Vladyslav Pavlovich KTS wrote: I know that in other SRM there is a concept of the type of license: - client's - partnership In fact, Vanbox now only has a client license, in order to implement projects, you need to buy a client license (although I am not a client and will not work in this client's SRM), because the partnership does not exist anymore, and that's sad. [/quote] +1

+1, this is not entirely correct, since only partners can get access to the box, so why should they take a license? Clients will not be able to abuse this setting and give access to each other.

I also don't understand why you can't leave access for the OS as well - you allocate free licenses for partners - I specifically prohibit access for employees, because ordinary licenses are enough. Maxim - please review the decision and allow partner access https://crm-onebox.com/ua/client-access/

[quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: everything is simple - let the client take into account when purchasing that 1 license will be occupied by the integrator and voila) [/quote] I don't see any sense for a client to buy a license just for the integrator. Automatically, the cost of work becomes higher. [quote] Korop Vladyslav Pavlovich KTS wrote: I know that in other SRM there is a concept of the type of license: - client's - partnership In fact, Vanbox now only has a client license, in order to implement projects, you need to buy a client license (although I am not a client and will not work in this client's SRM), because the partnership does not exist anymore, and that's sad. [/quote] Excellent solution!

In OneBox OS, there is no difference between a partner/client/employee, everything requires a user. Why so? Because I want so. What in exchange? Cancellation of affiliate commission for OS projects (you will be notified in a few days).

[quote] Miroshnichenko Maxim wrote: What in exchange? Cancellation of affiliate commission for OS projects (you will be notified in a few days). [/quote] That is, you deliberately reach into the client's pocket, do you give out some goodies to the integrators? I honestly don't care under what conditions you work with integrators or what you call them there. But I am not completely satisfied with the fact that you are forcing me to buy another license. And this is more than a thousand dollars + updates. Don't you think this is too much? [quote] Ustimenko Igor OneBox production wrote: now the client clearly sees to whom he gave access and how to take it away, and there are no problems with confidentiality [/quote] I agree here. Without strict access control, the box turns into a passage yard.

[quote] Oleksandr Lysenko wrote: That is, you deliberately reach into the client's pocket, do you give out some goodies to the integrators? I honestly don't care under what conditions you work with integrators or what you call them there. But I am not completely satisfied with the fact that you are forcing me to buy another license. And this is more than a thousand dollars + updates. Don't you think this is too much? [/quote] You yourself came up with the idea that we are reaching into the pockets of clients. I didn't say it, I didn't write it, and I didn't mean it. But if you put the question in this way, then we get into the pockets of the integrators: I force them to buy an activation key for implementation and use it in the client's project while they implement it. Because now the scheme is like this: - OneBox attracted a client (the price of attraction for us is in the range of $1,300 - $3,000 for a cloud box, that's cool, right?) - the client was given an integrator or the client chose the integrator himself - OneBox helps the integrator, makes software additions at his request - suddenly the integrator hacked or turned on the asshole, as a result of which the client disconnects from OneBox - in the end, OneBox made losses, and the integrator made money (because he has a part-time job) Therefore, let the integrator invest in the client's project. Is it possible to assume that the integrator will transfer the cost of this key to the client? Yes, but it will be on the conscience of a specific integrator company, not OneBox. Option 2: Let's say the client bought OneBox and hired an employee to manage OneBox. And how does this scheme differ from working with an integrator? In this case, the activation key is also given for free?

If the integrators provide themselves with the keys for their work (I draw an analogy with the service station, where I only bring my car. Without tools), then I agree with you. But from what I read above, I saw that now, as the director of the company, if I want to further refine the software, I will have to pay extra. license It would not be bad if integrators purchased any service key (like a service code on an intercom) and used it to configure the client's software. If this is exactly what you had in mind, then I support it. Also, I will support the idea when I, as a box administrator, will decide who exactly to give access to my SRM. It bothers me so much that anyone from your admins, programmers, integrators, anyone can go there now. And there is no need to talk about a "tick". She lets either everyone or no one.

+1 for the fact that the integrator did not occupy the license.

[quote] Oleksandr Lysenko wrote: It would not be bad if integrators purchased any service key (like a service code on an intercom) and used it to configure the client's software. [/quote] And this is a good idea, thanks for the tip. I will think about making service keys. There are no such keys now, but there will be :)

[quote] Oleksandr Lysenko wrote: 2. It is up to the owner to decide who is allowed and who is not allowed into his box. That is, if I work with a specific integrator, then I allow access to my software only to him and to no one else. Or, for example, to a programmer from TP to solve some problem and only to him at his request. [/quote] This is already the case in the OS.

[quote] Miroshnichenko Maxim wrote: In OneBox OS, there is no difference between a partner/client/employee, everything requires a user. Why so? Because I want so. What in exchange? Cancellation of affiliate commission for OS projects (you will be notified in a few days). [/quote] Maxim, as I understand it, this is one of the basic issues of the form of cooperation with integrators I will express my point of view about it if so, sorry for the banality, but the mathematics of the cost of the integrator's service is based on the principles below a lead is not yet a client The lead becomes a client only after the first payment and here the integrator incurs additional costs: - for marketing - for advertising - for sale you can do everything yourself, or you can outsource everything, which will affect the cost I mean that integrators are forced in the proposed model not so much to adjust the system as to promote their own product that is, when you are not ready to do it yourself, you pay someone