To Navigate or Not To Navigate

Seriously, I love the people at Microsoft working on our product, well, most of them.

But, every now and then you can really see that the company is like a country and not everything works like it should.

I am currently doing a project in NAV2015 where we changed the posting routines and added journals and entries. Thus we needed to change Navigate and test. I did that without thinking.

However when I started to train end users I noticed something funny.


Navigate has always been in the product, at least as long as I can remember.

Back in the 1990’s it was a unique selling point of the product. It looked like this:


This screencapture is Navision 2.0 (On a windows 8.1 machine, yes it works like a charm).

NAV 2015

On NAV 2015 looking for Navigate, an end user finds this:


Seriously. What do you want an honest blogger to say without hurting the feelings of my friends in Vedbaek?

It looks like it is introduced in NAV2013


In 2009 the option was called “Related Information” which makes more sense and is more intuitive.


Microsoft can you please fix this?


  1. eernst says:

    The main problem as I see it, is that the location of Navigate is not consistent. It needs a default short-cut and location.
    Also the above screen shut is not Navision 2.0. Navision 2.0 was the DOS product – the version before the AL language. Your screen shut was in Navision Financials 2.0. 🙂


  2. Mike Doster says:

    It is actually worse than this!

    First the Page ActionContainer SubType for the Navigate tab is still called RelatedInformation in 2015 which makes the choices confusing at least. Also there seems to be no documentation on this except Dave and Chris Studebaker’s book Programming Microsoft Dynamics Nav 2013 in the section on page actions

    Second, there is now a page type Navigate that has nothing to do with the older Navigate functionality. In fact the PageType property for the 2015 Navigate page (344) is ListPlus, not Navigate!

    I completely agree they should look at making this more consistent, or at least more completely documented. It is all great functionality, just confusing currently.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.