JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Reviews

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is used by our clients that use different modules, such as payroll and finance. I primarily use the payroll module.

The most valuable feature of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is the flashback it quickly takes you to the data browser. Additionally, one of the newer tools is the orchestrator which is very good.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne could improve the speed because sometimes it takes time to load into the environment. This is typical when the ESU patch packages are used.

I have been using JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for approximately three years.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is stable.

The scalability of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is good.

We have approximately 40 clients using

I rate the support from JD Edwards EnterpriseOne a four out of five.

The setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne difficulty depends on the module being installed by the client. The setup does not take much time but the implementation of the modules can take approximately 18 weeks to complete. If there are multiple modules being implemented it can take approximately six months.

I am a consultant that does the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne implementations.

The price of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is high. However, every ERP solution has a high price.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate JD Edwards EnterpriseOne eight out of ten.

We basically provide the consulting and we just do the implementation for the clients with JD Edwards.

The accounting portion is very good for one. The financials are great. 

The integrations are good. Right now, the orchestration is very good. The new feature, which is coming as orchestration and UDO, offers different objects, which are currently in demand now. The integration with the different third-party systems is great.

The solution is easy to set up.

It's quite stable. 

They are trying to provide one-view reporting. They have the interface with Hubble and other reporting, however, we just want that to be a part of JD Edwards. They should have the reporting, the financial reports, however, right now, people use other software. They take on third-party software, like Hubble. It's an Oracle product only. They interface with JD Edwards. 

I've been working with the solution for 13 years. 

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

You can scale the solution if you need to. 

For support, we have tickets. The support varies from client to client. We've got the solution from Oracle. My support is there. Once we raise the queue with Oracle we receive that feedback.

The solution is easy to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

We handle installations for our clients. 

The cost is a bit expensive, however, the licensing model is good. There are some items, such as reporting, that will cost extra. Clients might need to purchase BI tools. That's where it can get expensive for them.

We are partners with Oracle.

If it's a medium or large-scale operation, I'm happy if people go for that ERP. If they want to not spend too much on their solution, like on an SAP or Oracle, this is a good option. I work for bigger clients, they have this product and they are using it for more than 12 or 15 years now and they're really happy and they're big, big, big. Therefore, the customer, if they want, could go for this product first, and if they want to go for EBS or SAP, or any other ERP, they can move over.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature is customization through E1 tools because Oracle JDE is neither prepared nor updated in time for Latin America localizations.

Financial reports are clearer and better aligned with business expectations.

I would like to see the following:

• Improvements in GL, AP, AR and sales and supply chain
• A standard solution for the deployment server to automate, assemble, build, and deploy packages by schedule. We need to develop or look for third party solutions. The same goes for E1 Pages.
• An easier setup

We have used this solution for five years.

We did have some stability issues. We currently use IBM WebSphere 7.1 and it sometimes does not look like it is 100% compatible.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

We used to work with JDE World Software Version A7.3. We changed because the business required more advanced technology functions like mobility and financial reporting.

The setup was absolutely straightforward. It was mostly on the end-user paradigm from using the Word software (green screen) to a web-based application.

Find a way to manage licenses wisely. Negotiate it as best as you can with your provider because it is very expensive.

We evaluated SAP and Oracle EBS.

Evaluate the known issues, implement the most stable tool releases, and keep your ASUs/ESUs up-to-date.

It is a good product for managing the business. We can manage supply chain and distribution, manufacturing, finance, etc.

I'm a consultant. I work for different clients, and I have worked on different versions, such as XP, 8.12, 9.1, and 9.2.

The good thing about it is that it is very customizable. We can modify it the way we want.

With the new versions, it has become very user-friendly. We have integration with mobiles, and we have cloud-based solutions. There are a lot of things that can be done by front-end users without technical knowledge. They can create reports without having to do any coding, and it's very good now.

If they can research and make the installation part easier or more user-friendly, it would be nice.

I have been using this solution for about 10 years. 

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. The client I'm currently working with has about a thousand users, but I've worked with other clients with a lot more users, such as about 5,000 or so, across different geographies.

There is currently no plan to increase its usage.

It is pretty good, but when we contact Oracle support, we have to first do our homework. They need several things before they look into any issues. 

Oracle provides support for standard things. They support the standard or vanilla product. If we have a lot of customizations, it gets tricky. We are responsible for the things we change, and they are mostly responsible for the standard part. So, the more customizations we have, the trickier it gets.

I used a product from Oracle as a CRM tool, but I haven't used any other ERP. I've only been using JD Edwards.

It is not very straightforward. You need a very technical person to do that or assist you. The installation is okay, but when you're implementing, you have to do adjustments to make it work for your business. So, it does require a little bit of technical expertise. You might need help from Oracle as well. 

The installation takes a few days, but the implementation can take a few months.

In terms of maintenance, in the current team that I'm working with, there are about 25 to 30 people for IT support for 1,000 users.

I find it really good. I have limited exposure to the product, and from my point of view, it is very customizable. It is very good because we can modify the way we want. It is stable as long as we are following Oracle guidelines.

I would definitely recommend it to others. I love it. With the new versions, it has become very good. 

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is an ERP solution for our customer's business processes comprising of manufacturing, financials, procurement, inventory, et cetera.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne has improved within all the solutions and there have been a lot of investments by Oracle in these solutions. Most of the functionalities, and business requirements, are available for the system in the solution and there have been enhancements to the processes, UI, and tools, which have been done on a regular basis.

The inbuilt BI user experience and enhanced UI analytics, are very good. These are key features I love about the solution. It is more user-friendly with functionalities continually updating and there's less technical dependency. Rather than hiring a technical person to explain everything or doing the development for you, anyone can do it on their own without any technical help, such as the end-users.

I have been using JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for approximately 18 years.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is highly stable.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is best suited for small and medium business enterprises. There are multiple features in the solution that customers look for and this is why it has been a good solution for the past 30 to 35 years in the market.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is a scalable solution.

If there's any problem, such as a bug in the system, you have the solution on the knowledge garden, on the Oracle website.

I am an engineer for the last 18 years and I have not seen any other solution from the market that is better. I have seen some comparable solutions, that might be on par with the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. However, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is being rated as the tier one ERP in the industry for SMBs.

The initial setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is straightforward. However, it could improve.

I rate the setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne a three out of five.

The maintenance of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is very low. There can be support after the implementation, but I've seen a lot of customers using the solution without the support. They are able to maintain the solution on their own.

My advice to others is JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is excellent. It has multiple features and business processes of the industry, especially the manufacturing industry, out of the box. There are fewer customizations required. It can meet, 90 to 95 percent of the standard business processes' out-of-box functionality. It is a very good solution from a business point of view.

I rate JD Edwards EnterpriseOne a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for the financial model. We use it for accounts receivable, with payments, accounting, fixed assets, inventory, and purchasing.

We are a quite large B2B company. The solution is deployed on-premise.

I think it is strong in sales, inventory, and pricing.

Something that could be included is a supply chain management system. That's what we're looking for.

I have been using this solution for 25 years.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good. We can do a lot without any problems. We have about 600 people using this solution.

Setup is simple. For deployment, we used eight people to run the software.

We used both consultants and resellers for deployment.

The licensing costs are on a yearly basis, and there are no additional costs.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

We are using the latest version. 

We use the solution for operational requirements, including procurement, inventory and management. As we are advocates of contraction, we cover almost everything within the system. 

We found that the system was unable to address many of our concerns, especially when it comes to project management. We actually found it to be quite hard to use and to lack user-friendliness, which is the reason we decided to move. 

While the overall function for providing coverage is good, the way the system works turned out to be a bit difficult. Efficiency was an issue, as well as user-friendliness. Something which would take five minutes in a standard ERP, takes 10 with the solution. The method of handling the entire transactions should be greatly simplified.

When it comes to scalability, a much larger team is needed to handle the system than would otherwise be the case with an SAP solution. 

The solution is really expensive. 

If used properly, one can see a return on his investment. If not, it will cost a person a lot of money. It's that simple. 

I have worked with technical support and it actually involves two types of consultants, one technical and the other functional. The technical requirements, such as coding, which comprise the backend, should have more people involved for delivering what is needed.

We have been using JD Edwards EnterpriseOne in excess of four to five years. 

The solution is stable.

When it comes to scalability, a much larger team is needed to handle the system than would otherwise be the case with an SAP solution.

The solution is used extensively in our organization. 

I have worked with technical support and it actually involves two types of consultants, one technical and the other functional. The technical requirements, such as coding, which comprise the backend, should have more people involved for delivering what is needed. 

We have plans to move to another solution. 

Much cost-consuming staff is needed for deployment and maintenance. 

If used properly, one can see a return on his investment. If not, it will cost a person a lot of money. It's that simple.

The solution is really expensive.

When it comes to scalability, a much larger team is needed to handle the system than would otherwise be the case with an SAP solution.

The deployment is handled through a third party; in which we have a team of consultants. They handle everything, from the setup, to the implementation, to the training. 

My advice to others is that they use what is available in the system and not attempt to exceed its capacity. 

I rate JD Edwards EnterpriseOne as a five out of ten. 

Recently, we helped one of our clients to implement centralized procurement using the solution. Our clients used to handle their procurement activities separately for individual countries. Now, they have centralized procurement. We do not implement the solution for our clients. We do small projects like improvements to the existing systems.

The solution’s Accounts Payable and Procurement modules are the most stable and quite useful compared to other finance modules. For modules related to finance, we are quite satisfied with the AP, General Accounting, Procurement, Sales, and Inventory modules.

During our procurement centralization project, we noticed that the EDI interface is slightly complicated. Certain fields are insignificant, but we have to enter information into those fields because the system would not proceed further without those inputs. So, the EDI interface should be improved. The Fixed Asset module is not desirable because it is complicated.

Though the solution has a lot of good features, I do not like the dashboard. If VA tools can be integrated into the solution, it will be helpful for key decision-makers in the organization, like CFOs and CIOs. Currently, these decision-makers rely on a separate VA tool to obtain information.

I have been using JD Edwards since 2007.

The stability of the solution has been a challenge. I would rate stability a seven out of ten.

The scalability of the product is not great. Some users are more comfortable with SAP as compared to JD Edwards. Our clients are generally medium-sized enterprises. I rate the scalability a five out of ten.

The technical support is good. Oracle responds to the queries we post. They are quite knowledgeable. Support has not been a challenge for us.

Positive

In my previous organization, I used Tally. JD Edwards is a much more vast and better tool when compared to Tally. The best part about JD Edwards is that it is an integrated system. All the modules are interrelated. The transactions are interfaced with the finance system, which serves as a reporting mechanism.

If a client asks us to create a new report, our developer takes more time to create the report. If there were any tools available within JD Edwards, it could have helped the developer to code faster.

Since I have been working with the solution for around 15 years, I find the initial setup and configuration simple and straightforward. We need basic experience and domain knowledge to easily understand the configuration and setups. I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten.

The deployment of the solution does not take much time. It is manageable. The CNC administrator team manages the deployment. Deployment is not a challenge.

I am a subject matter expert for finance. People looking to start using JD Edwards should look at the chart of accounts and other basic setups in the finance modules to get an overview of the solution. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.