MS Project 2003 vs 2007

[MJ]

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007. One of my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related (fixed work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2 differnt resources. In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4 & 5, in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish day, what she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything remained the same
in the future weeks. However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the future hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle this issue?

Thanks in advance!

 

[JulieS]

Hi MJ,

My comments are inline.

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007. One of
my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related (fixed
work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2 differnt
resources.

[Julie] Okay, so each resource is assigned at 5% assignment level
to the task.

In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4 & 5,
in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish day, what
she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything
remained the same
in the future weeks.

[Julie] I'm not clear. Did she enter zero in the Work field or the
Actual Work field? In Project 2003 or 2007, if she entered zero in
the Actual Work field for however long -- it will not do as you
outline above. Entering zero work in the Actual Work field will
cause Project to shift the scheduled work forward, changing the
finish date of the task and keeping the total amount of work the
same. If however, she entered zero in the Work field, then it will
simply drop the total amount of work on the task keeping the finish
date the same.

However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the future
hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's
future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle this
issue?

Thanks in advance!

[Julie] I think you need to clarify with the user precisely what
fields she is entering the zeros into. That is what accounts for
the change -- not a difference in whether it is 2003 or 2007. Both
products work the same way in this respect.

I hope this helps. Let us know how you get along.

Julie
Project MVP

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for the FAQs and additional
information about Microsoft Project

 

[MJ]

Hi Julie,

Thanks for the comments.
She entered zero in Work field, not actual. In 2003 version, it did drop
the total amount work, and keep the finish date. However, in 2007 version,
after she entered zero in Work field, it dropped total amount of work, and
changed all the start & finish date of all the resources that were assigned
to this task. It actually moved the start date earlier.

Hi MJ,

My comments are inline.

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007. One of
my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related (fixed
work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2 differnt
resources.

[Julie] Okay, so each resource is assigned at 5% assignment level
to the task.

In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4 & 5,
in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish day, what
she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything
remained the same
in the future weeks.

[Julie] I'm not clear. Did she enter zero in the Work field or the
Actual Work field? In Project 2003 or 2007, if she entered zero in
the Actual Work field for however long -- it will not do as you
outline above. Entering zero work in the Actual Work field will
cause Project to shift the scheduled work forward, changing the
finish date of the task and keeping the total amount of work the
same. If however, she entered zero in the Work field, then it will
simply drop the total amount of work on the task keeping the finish
date the same.

However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the future
hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's
future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle this
issue?

Thanks in advance!

[Julie] I think you need to clarify with the user precisely what
fields she is entering the zeros into. That is what accounts for
the change -- not a difference in whether it is 2003 or 2007. Both
products work the same way in this respect.

I hope this helps. Let us know how you get along.

Julie
Project MVP

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for the FAQs and additional
information about Microsoft Project

 

[JulieS]

HI MJ,

Thanks for the clarification that she is changing Work, not Actual
Work. Entering zero in the work field does certainly change the
total work -- both in Project 2003 and 2007. However, I am unable
to get the start date of a task to change by either by zeroing out
work at the beginning of the task or mid-task. The duration drops
but neither the start nor end date change.

Can you reproduce what your user reports in a new project -- I am
unable to reproduce the behavior at all. Please try to repro and
give us step-by-step instructions about what was done and what the
result is. Please also check your service pack levels to Project --
you should be at SP-1 with the latest cumulative updates installed.

Julie

Hi Julie,

Thanks for the comments.
She entered zero in Work field, not actual. In 2003 version, it
did drop
the total amount work, and keep the finish date. However, in 2007
version,
after she entered zero in Work field, it dropped total amount of
work, and
changed all the start & finish date of all the resources that were
assigned
to this task. It actually moved the start date earlier.

Hi MJ,

My comments are inline.

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007. One
of
my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related
(fixed
work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2 differnt
resources.

[Julie] Okay, so each resource is assigned at 5% assignment
level
to the task.

In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4 &
5,
in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish day,
what
she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything
remained the same
in the future weeks.

[Julie] I'm not clear. Did she enter zero in the Work field or
the
Actual Work field? In Project 2003 or 2007, if she entered zero
in
the Actual Work field for however long -- it will not do as you
outline above. Entering zero work in the Actual Work field will
cause Project to shift the scheduled work forward, changing the
finish date of the task and keeping the total amount of work the
same. If however, she entered zero in the Work field, then it
will
simply drop the total amount of work on the task keeping the
finish
date the same.

However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the future
hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's
future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle this
issue?

Thanks in advance!

[Julie] I think you need to clarify with the user precisely what
fields she is entering the zeros into. That is what accounts for
the change -- not a difference in whether it is 2003 or 2007.
Both
products work the same way in this respect.

I hope this helps. Let us know how you get along.

Julie
Project MVP

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for the FAQs and additional
information about Microsoft Project

 

[MJ]

Hi Julies,

Thanks for following up with this issue. Our Project App. has SP1 and the
Cummulative updates. I could not reproduce that behavior either when I use a
test file. However, I think I found a way for her to work around. If you
enter Zero in Work field first, then enter Zero in Actual field, it seems
like behaved the same way as 2003 version, which is reduce the total amount
work, and keep the same finish date.

Thanks for trying! I appreciate it very much.

HI MJ,

Thanks for the clarification that she is changing Work, not Actual
Work. Entering zero in the work field does certainly change the
total work -- both in Project 2003 and 2007. However, I am unable
to get the start date of a task to change by either by zeroing out
work at the beginning of the task or mid-task. The duration drops
but neither the start nor end date change.

Can you reproduce what your user reports in a new project -- I am
unable to reproduce the behavior at all. Please try to repro and
give us step-by-step instructions about what was done and what the
result is. Please also check your service pack levels to Project --
you should be at SP-1 with the latest cumulative updates installed.

Julie

Hi Julie,

Thanks for the comments.
She entered zero in Work field, not actual. In 2003 version, it
did drop
the total amount work, and keep the finish date. However, in 2007
version,
after she entered zero in Work field, it dropped total amount of
work, and
changed all the start & finish date of all the resources that were
assigned
to this task. It actually moved the start date earlier.

Hi MJ,

My comments are inline.

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007. One
of
my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related
(fixed
work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2 differnt
resources.

[Julie] Okay, so each resource is assigned at 5% assignment
level
to the task.

In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4 &
5,
in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish day,
what
she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything
remained the same
in the future weeks.

[Julie] I'm not clear. Did she enter zero in the Work field or
the
Actual Work field? In Project 2003 or 2007, if she entered zero
in
the Actual Work field for however long -- it will not do as you
outline above. Entering zero work in the Actual Work field will
cause Project to shift the scheduled work forward, changing the
finish date of the task and keeping the total amount of work the
same. If however, she entered zero in the Work field, then it
will
simply drop the total amount of work on the task keeping the
finish
date the same.

However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the future
hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's
future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle this
issue?

Thanks in advance!

[Julie] I think you need to clarify with the user precisely what
fields she is entering the zeros into. That is what accounts for
the change -- not a difference in whether it is 2003 or 2007.
Both
products work the same way in this respect.

I hope this helps. Let us know how you get along.

Julie
Project MVP

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for the FAQs and additional
information about Microsoft Project

 

[JulieS]

You're welcome MJ. Glad to have helped and thanks for the feedback.
Julie

Hi Julies,

Thanks for following up with this issue. Our Project App. has SP1
and the
Cummulative updates. I could not reproduce that behavior either
when I use a
test file. However, I think I found a way for her to work around.
If you
enter Zero in Work field first, then enter Zero in Actual field,
it seems
like behaved the same way as 2003 version, which is reduce the
total amount
work, and keep the same finish date.

Thanks for trying! I appreciate it very much.

HI MJ,

Thanks for the clarification that she is changing Work, not
Actual
Work. Entering zero in the work field does certainly change the
total work -- both in Project 2003 and 2007. However, I am
unable
to get the start date of a task to change by either by zeroing
out
work at the beginning of the task or mid-task. The duration
drops
but neither the start nor end date change.

Can you reproduce what your user reports in a new project -- I am
unable to reproduce the behavior at all. Please try to repro and
give us step-by-step instructions about what was done and what
the
result is. Please also check your service pack levels to
Project --
you should be at SP-1 with the latest cumulative updates
installed.

Julie

Hi Julie,

Thanks for the comments.
She entered zero in Work field, not actual. In 2003 version,
it
did drop
the total amount work, and keep the finish date. However, in
2007
version,
after she entered zero in Work field, it dropped total amount
of
work, and
changed all the start & finish date of all the resources that
were
assigned
to this task. It actually moved the start date earlier.

:

Hi MJ,

My comments are inline.

Hi, recently we've upgrated from MS Project 2003 to 2007.
One
of
my users
has a complain about entering hours.
In 2003, when there is a task that was non-project related
(fixed
work), she
planned flat 2 hours a week thru. out the year for 2
differnt
resources.

[Julie] Okay, so each resource is assigned at 5% assignment
level
to the task.

In
reality, that 2 resources didn't have any actual for week 4
&
5,
in order to
keep the future work balaced, and not changed the finish
day,
what
she did
was enter "0" in the work cell for that 3 weeks, everything
remained the same
in the future weeks.

[Julie] I'm not clear. Did she enter zero in the Work field
or
the
Actual Work field? In Project 2003 or 2007, if she entered
zero
in
the Actual Work field for however long -- it will not do as
you
outline above. Entering zero work in the Actual Work field
will
cause Project to shift the scheduled work forward, changing
the
finish date of the task and keeping the total amount of work
the
same. If however, she entered zero in the Work field, then it
will
simply drop the total amount of work on the task keeping the
finish
date the same.

However, in 2007 version, it didn't act the same way as
2003. It actually changed the start date, and moved the
future
hours to week
2 & 3. At the mean time, it also moved the other resource's
future hours.

Anyone has any explanations or any suggustions to handle
this
issue?

Thanks in advance!

[Julie] I think you need to clarify with the user precisely
what
fields she is entering the zeros into. That is what accounts
for
the change -- not a difference in whether it is 2003 or 2007.
Both
products work the same way in this respect.

I hope this helps. Let us know how you get along.

Julie
Project MVP

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for the FAQs and additional
information about Microsoft Project