Agreed. Having the name of the field being "Name", would be OK, if everyone knew what is used for the name of every asset. However, that doesn't work well in an Asset Management role. Especially when that field is a required field for that Asset.. My work-around is to create another field with the name of the field set to what I want it to be. That gives me 2 fields, named differently, with the same data. Redundant, wasteful and ugly.

Here's one of my replies from a similar Asset Control post, which describes the need for uniqueness and customization.

https://kace.uservoice.com/users/39760797-osujag/filters/my_feedback

This is one of the worst "resolutions" come up with so far. Jeff Lewis' suggestion, of providing a choice of allowing duplicates or not, was the perfect solution. Instead, the decision was made to just allow duplicates. Not only for the Name field, but for ALL fields, custom fields included.

I was told when this "fix" was applied, that there were more Kace Admins requesting that duplicates be allowed. So, that is why the feature was removed. (Or added, depending on how you want to look at it.) Basically, a reason was that I am out numbered in my needs. I'm sure that the many Admins wanted duplicates to be a choice, not the only choice.

My example also refers to Monitors. Whereas Jeff provides a simple descriptive name for his monitors as the Name, we have Non-Capital Asset labels we affix to every monitor. Those labels have a unique Barcode/Number, that we use as the Asset Name. We have students who create the assets and enter the asset information into Kace. Unfortunately, there are times when students create assets that have already been created. And, without the option of having a custom field that can be set to "Do Not Allow Duplicates", allows for duplicates. So now, I may have systems in Kace showing that there are 4 monitors or 8 monitors assigned to it, when there are actually 2. I definitely have systems with 4 monitors related. Yes, I know I can add the steps to procedures, to have the student first look to see if there's an asset already created. However, that adds extra training to our high-turnover student positions. And will require me team to audit what is in Kace, just to make sure there are no duplicates. Then, clean it up when those procedures are occasionally missed. This is unacceptable.

So, I reiterate; Jeff Lewis' suggestion, of "providing a choice" of allowing duplicates or not, was the perfect solution. With that not being an option, not even for at least one custom field, the Asset tracking is near useless as an Inventory Control Tool.

I've been Kace 1000 and 2000 customer since Kace was an independent product. Nearly 6 years. It's the little details that Kace provided that initially won my business. It'll be the little things that will lose it.

Please keep the options available. That is what made Kace the best.

This is something else that we are finding with KACE that would be nice to change. Changing "name" to something a little more appropriate for the asset type would be useful given the many varied types we are creating.

I agree. We really could use the ability to rename the "name" field in assets. It is a pain in every asset type. I'm ending up with admins created a second field the duplicates whatever the "Name" is so that it is called what we need and there is no question what we consider the name.

This is a similar to the request http://kace.uservoice.com/forums/82699-k1000/suggestions/2876642-ability-to-rename-name-field-for-assets

I think we should pool the votes into one request.

This is a similar to this request http://kace.uservoice.com/forums/82699-k1000/suggestions/1778967-allow-using-other-than-name-as-asset-s-primary

I think we should pool the votes into one request. Give this a better chance.

Looks like this got suggested a while ago. I'm trying to map the BIOS serial number to a field in the Inventory, so we can receive computers and scan them in without requiring a NAME field. I understand the workaround of "just knowing" that the name field equals the serial number, but I'd rather be able to map another field and have it be the index field.

I would agree too, same needs, sometimes "name" is not descrptive enough, or we need something else than a text value.

I would agree, there are occasions where it is more appropriate to have a field "Name" other than "Name", for example for a Mobile Phone to call the field "IMEI" makes sense as a primary key, so just the ability to call the Primary key field on an asset anything other than name would be helpful

Also, the ability to change the field type (again, such as a PO, I only want numbers, no other text characters)