JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Reviews

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. 

We are a consultancy and we use this solution to provide services for our customers.

Over time, I have used JD Edwards for a variety of use cases. One of the very recent ones was converting from strong discrete costing to actual costing in a manufacturing setting. Some other examples are capital asset management and AP automation.

The most valuable feature is the user experience, where you can create your own queries, it sends you alerts, and it's very flexible.

The interface is very user-friendly. As long as you apply logic, it is easy to do the technical stuff. It is structured well so you don't always have to depend on technical people to do things like create reports.

It has the latest features in terms of embedded mobility and orchestration.

The integration with other products is easy to do.

Customization is easy to do, as long as you stick to their rules. It can be customized in a cloud-based deployment, as well.

There are tools in place that allow users to update the system themselves, without any technical support.

Support for developers is easy because they have their own toolset. They have options for using SQL, RPG, and different languages, depending on the hardware that you're using.

I would like to see the HR features enhanced with respect to localization for South Africa and other countries. They have perhaps 12 localizations but I think that for countries like South Africa, where the payroll system is unique, they should start investing more heavily.

I would like to see more training documentation, or alternatively, training that you can do without having to go offsite. Unfortunately, when training with Oracle, it is quite expensive. Also, the instructors come from India and the dialect is very difficult for people from South Africa to understand. Consequently, a lot of people feel that it's a waste. It could have been very good but they didn't understand what the trainer was saying. This is a big thing that I would like to see more with. The documentation that they have is good, but it's very expensive so people would rather not buy it.

I have been working with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for about 20 years, since 2000. Prior to that, I had been using JD Edwards World since 1991.

EnterpriseOne is used on a daily basis and the actual solution is very stable, whether deployed on-premises in on the cloud. Stability will depend on who did the setup, as with any system. When you try to take short cuts then you end up short anyway.

It is absolutely easy to scale this product. We have about ten users in the company.

I have a little bit of experience with similar products from several vendors, including Microsoft Dynamics and SAP. I have found that the user experience is much nicer within JD Edwards, compared to anything else that I have seen. It is not rigid and allows you to change or customize things within the framework that is provided.

NetSuite is a little bit cheaper than JD Edwards, although they are catering more to smaller enterprises rather than medium-sized organizations. They compromise certain functionality or applications. A lot of the applications out there are good for startups, but the moment that you start diversifying, you have to start looking either at add-ons or re-implementing different ERPs. The trend lately is not to just replace everything. Rather, have additional or complementary products that suit your needs

With JD Edwards, it is a fully integrated system so you can run just certain modules, but it's optimized if you use the full ERP system. For example, if you need procurement, work orders, and financials, then there is a benefit to moving everything into one system.

Provided you understand the framework, it is quite easy to install and set up. After this, it is easy to maintain and manage. The length of time required for deployment depends on whether you have a proper blueprint because all of the processes are embedded. With all of the blueprints available, for a new installation, it can take between six and nine months.

The deployment will also depend on the state of your data. It may already be clean, or it maybe needs to be pre-processed before migrating. I would say that every situation is unique. You can do the majority of the setup offsite, just by getting all of the business processes in advance. Then, when you start UAT and other testing, you go onsite and go live. It's not that complex. I came from a financial background and moved into the IT sphere, which was not that difficult to do.

The maintenance is done with our in-house team. Normally, you have one person for every module. However, on the technical side, you only need one person because everything has been automated and is orchestrated to do a lot of the work for you. It just pops out some reports and alerts as it monitors the system for you.

In some cases, we used assistance from the vendor during the implementation, although we have also deployed it ourselves. These days, a lot of the migration, upgrades, or updates are done internally.

When it comes to supporting our customers, we are able to do functionality support because we've got in-house business analysts who do the actual applications. 

The licensing is for mid-market businesses, where it is cheaper than Oracle Cloud, EBS, or SAP. It is very much on part with Dynamics, although Dynamics can become quite pricey in the end.

The cost of licensing depends on the modules that are being used. It varies because some of them are user-based, whereas others are employee-based. 

There is a lite license and a normal license. People who use it full time, like in procurement or for someone doing purchase orders, use a normal license. On the other hand, when you get people that only do approvals, for instance, then they can get a lite license and it's a little bit cheaper.

Most of my experience is with on-premises deployments, although I have also worked in an environment where we hosted it on the cloud. If you have a cloud-based deployment then it's managed and maintained by the vendor, although you can still have your own customizations that are unique to the business.

The vendor continuously improves this product, basing their changes according to the feedback provided by customers. At this point in time, it is difficult to asks for specific features because they're very compatible with any other system in the market.

They are very strong in the manufacturing, construction, and engineering industries.

My advice for anybody who is implementing JD Edwards is to make sure that all of your processes are stabilized and standardized. Follow the best practices. Make sure that the processes are not coming from somebody who had good ideas 60 years ago but in reality, are no longer effective.

The best thing to do is make sure that the data is clean and you have the blueprints for the business processes according to best practices.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

It has simplified the process completely, and even though it has many features which are available in the market now, but it is on par with the other ERP software solutions available in the market now.

One feature is that J.D. Edwards supports any software it integrates with.

It's a 100% stable product. In past versions, there were issues of instability. But, now it is entirely stable, as long as it is properly maintained and properly implemented.

It can be scalable to any extent. There are no issues and no boundaries. We find for J.D. Edwards to scale. It can serve small medium and large enterprises at the same time.

Originally, there were some complications with implementation. But now, it is very simple to set up and get everything going in a couple of months. Oracle has done tremendous work on improving the issues that we were facing on the J.D. Edwards front, and they fixed all those issues. Now we do a straight forward, simple plug-and-play installation, so there are no problems technically now.

The pricing of this solution costs an arm and a leg. This keeps the customers away from going for J.D. Edwards.

We compared:

• JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs Dynamics AX
• JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs SAP
• JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs Red Hat. 

We selected JD Edwards because technically it was sound, and commercially, it came at a good price. It was a great value.

When looking for a new product, definitely consider:

• Stability
• IT technology
• Value

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.

My role for this product, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, is as a technical developer. I use almost all of the technical tools, including JDeveloper, which is a tool that we use for development, specifically web services development using Java programming. At the moment, JDeveloper is a product within Oracle that is integrated with our JD Edwards EnterpriseOne product for developing business services.

We all use JD Edwards EnterpriseOnes' core technical products, including the Universal Batch Engine, which we use for report development. Another tool is used for interactive application development.

And the name-giving tools and business functions that we create based on the needs. So those are the types of business functions that we create with JD name-giving tool programming, and you can see the functions that we use in C+, C++ for Java, and JD Edwards name-giving tool programming languages. When it comes to databases, I have experience in both executing and writing SQL.

I like all of the progress Oracle has made with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. They have introduced a new tool, Orchestrator, in the most recent version or the most recent separated version of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. It is a replica or a replacement for the development of business services, in my opinion. We use the Orchestrator tool to develop the orchestration processes, which we then use for data migration from the Legacy system to JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, and vice versa if you're using that tool.

I like the terminologist, which I would say is a must-have feature that was missing when I was using OneWorld. Prior to JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, there was OneWorld, and there were no requesting tokens, holding tokens, or resuming the object for myself. Unless I give them permission, no one else can check it out and start working on it to write code. As a result, that is an enhancement to the OneWorld in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

I have worked with various types of objects. I have worked with almost all types of objects. I was given an excellent opportunity to work on a wide range of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne objects.

The 1V reporting is straightforward and simple to use. Creating 1V reports does not require any technical knowledge. This is quite interesting, and I know how to work on it; it is not a part of improvement, and I am aware of it. Aside from that, I haven't worked on any JD Edwards EnterpriseOne E1 pages.

I'm really looking forward to some opportunities to get some work done on it so that I can learn JD Edwards EnterpriseOne E1 pages and gain some experience.

They have all of the good models, such as finance, supply chain, recruitment, HRMS, accounts receivable, and payable.

Despite the fact that it is an old technology, we still have good projects and good work. It's an excellent technological product that any client should consider.

Oracle has introduced Orchestrator as a new technical tool in the most recent upgraded version.

I didn't get much experience working on this Orchestrator, but I did watch some tutorials and do some exercises on my own. And, to be honest, I don't have such an environment for orchestration development. That is something I need to look into, study, and have peace of mind about. Aside from that, there are some technical tools introduced by Oracle that I have not worked on. I have a lot of 1V reporting. 1V reporting is a type of interactive reporting tool that Oracle has introduced in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

In a nutshell, Orchestrator is the primary technical tool on which I would like to focus my efforts.

The tools we use for data transformation from Legacy to JD Edwards EnterpriseOne are inbound and outbound from JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. Most of us as technical people believe that the suite processors or EDI processors introduced by JD Edwards EnterpriseOne and Oracle are more reliable when compared to the most advanced tools for business development orchestration, such as JDeveloper. Because the objective of using it is the same, it's for data transformation.

We believe that the older features or tools provided by Oracle are more reliable than the new ones. If you ask me, I would prefer to stick with the older tools that we use for data transformation because they are more reliable.

The implementation phase is critical. If that is done correctly, it will be a 10 out of 10.
That is a very important part, as it is the first stage when you buy this product. If the product has been successfully implemented, you will receive a score of 10 out of 10. The implementation procedure could be simplified. Then there's customization, product customization, as well as customization for your business environment. That can be counted separately, not all at once.

I have been working with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for more than ten years.

We are using the latest version.

We have not deployed it using the cloud, because the project that I have been working with does not yet use the cloud.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is a stable, and reliable product.

My current project is a US project, and I can tell you that we have a team of about 250 people. 250 people, but not all of them in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne. We have nearly 50 people in different teams at JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

There are many more in this project. I'm not sure if there are any other projects that are using this product. But there are several projects, but I'm only going to tell you about my current project.

JD EnterpriseOne's product is simple to use and understand. When it comes to ERP technology, there are many models, all of them, that have been widely used in the United States, first and foremost, and it is developed are with the needs of the US clients in mind.

Oracle does offer technical support. They do provide technical assistance. Oracle is a company that offers technical support.

We do obtain licenses from Oracle. For example, I work for a client who provides us with access to Oracle support and licenses. And whenever we get stuck somewhere, whether it's a problem with a JD Edwards EnterpriseOne product, a technical problem, a functional problem, or anything else, we just write a query on the Oracle support portal. There is an Oracle support portal where we can submit our questions, and they respond within two to three working days.

We've been writing them, our queries, directly to Oracle support, and they do respond, and they respond as quickly as they can.

I was not involved in the deployment process. I do work on product development. I'm the head of JDeveloper.

Deployment of the product is handled by a different department known as the CNC department. CNC consultants are more aware of it. 

We have separate teams, for the product deployment. 

There are some maintenance activities that our CNC team has been doing for a long time. I'll give you an example, of maintenance activities. The client may be using a specific product version, and there may be some ESUs or stars, which we, or a CNC consultant, may apply to that product upon function approval.

Those ESUs will sort when there is consolidation or when there is a package that includes some of the additional functionality for any particular object that is not present in the version that the client has been using. In that case, we identify the ESUs and stars to which we must apply in specific objects. Accordingly, we accept those functions and approvals. We, as technical personnel, reviewed them, the code that ESU and the stars requested, and upon function approval, the CMC consultants applied on those objects, the list of objects wherever it is required. This is the type of maintenance that CNC workers perform on a regular basis.

In terms of price, it is not on the high end. When compared to the SAP product, it is significantly less expensive.

If you buy the product and then get support from Oracle directly, they will charge you.

It is conditional. If you buy some additional licenses from them to use products, I believe they will give you access to that when you buy a product. That is present, of course, but if you require something additional from them, an addition to the product, there are some sub-products there you will require in the future, so they will charge for that or any valid services for some years or some time period, but those charges are also very minimal.

Oracle is my company's partner, and JD is an Oracle product. It's a partner to my company, and it's a client partner, but they have a license to a product version, and they also have Oracle support. There is an Oracle support portal; we ask a question, the client asks a question, and the client asks another question. We have had discussions with Oracle about this product. If you purchase this product, you will receive Oracle support for the initial days.

When you buy JD Edwards products, the first step that you will need is JD Edwards implementation. For each model that you purchase, you will require the services of some functional experts. When you purchase it as a product, you will be purchasing some models from them. You will require a financial model as well as supply chain models. For each model, you will undoubtedly require supply chain, finance, and consulting. They will be responsible for the product's implementation.

I would definitely recommend this solution because I have had a great experience working with this product as a developer.

I would rate JD Edwards EnterpriseOne an eight out of ten.

Every single module has some particular value depending on who the type of user is. For example, the Address Book is a master data feature. It offers a lot of different types of credits and collections. It allows you to hone in on the credit holds, allows you to be specific if you need some customer statements, or provides reminder letters. It allows you different cross-language functionality, which we need across the different countries that we're in. It allows you to have different payment terms. It has this Address Book by line of business, so that if you had multiple business units, you could hone in on each credit and collection based upon each business unit specific, while using the same, single customer.

The product is pretty spot on. The nicest feature that I love about Address Book, and just JD Edwards in general, is that it always gives you an inquiry screen before you actually add an order entry, and it always allows you. But before you delete something, it always questions you, "Are you sure you really want to do this?" No matter what version you're in, it always asks you that -- tried and true.

There's a lot of patches and bugs that come along when you're doing your upgrade that were not found or hidden during the user-acceptance testing. So now there's a lot of base lines that have to be applied, so that's rather disappointing.

We've been on JD Edwards for a while now. It was on our previous platform, and it was used by most of our regions, so this was decided back in 2008.

We've had no issues with deployment.

I just went live with an upgrade, so it's not stable. We have tons of disconnects. We just went up on the Oracle Cloud, and it has horrendous stability, with internet browser issues, compatibility issues, and we're trying to determine if it is on the network side of my local network or is it on the Oracle side.

We're still investigating whether it will scale. We've only been live for six weeks, so it's a critical product that's being highly reviewed. But we're taking it one step at a time.

If it's critical and we keep raising it, as long as there's a ticket, technical support will respond to us. Even if we go to the top of Oracle, they still need a ticket. Then they'll double-check your work, and so they really want it to be specific before they'll actually proceed with anything else.

The initial setup is complex because you're going up on the cloud. Coming from where we were before to where we are now took us about two-and-a-half years.

I'd encourage others to use it, but I've been using JD Edwards for a very long time. Others would choose an SAP product over this because they over a full-blown solution. If your data isn't aligned and you don't have all the garbage taken out, you're going to end up with the same bad system you had before you implemented it.

This is a stable and solid product. 

We've lost the second and third layer of support to a company that specializes in JD Edwards, so they do all the changes for us. 

I've been using this solution for 12 years. 

We have some small issues but the stability is fine. 

The scalability is good. 

We have a monthly SOA meeting. Tech support is always busy with tickets, incidents, changes and service requests.

The initial setup is somewhere between straightforward and complex. It was not straightforward, but it was done a while ago and would likely be simpler these days. We used a third party for our implementation 12 years ago. We now have 600 users. 

We've seen a return on our investment. 

The licensing costs are reasonable. 

I recommend this solution and rate it 10 out of 10. 

I help implement it, set it up, and support it. It is really good for clients who use it for financials, supply chain, payroll, human resources, and manufacturing, so almost everything.

I use multiple versions of it, such as 9.0, 9.1, and 9.2, because I support many customers. In terms of deployment, the customers have all kinds of deployments such as traditional data centers, public cloud, and private cloud.

It brings operational efficiency by integrating different processes within the organization into one system. It also brings best practices of the industry into your processes. You can configure the processes within the software in a way that they align with the best practices that exist in the industry.

It is highly configurable. You have a choice in terms of how you want to run it. You can run it in your own data center, in a private cloud, or in a public cloud. The choice is really up to the customer.

They have been improving it every day, but it could have more automation. 

I have been working with this solution for 19 years. 

It is pretty stable now. There were earlier releases that weren't as stable, but it is becoming more and more stable every day.

It can scale if architected well. It is highly configurable, and it is dependent on how a customer chooses to set it up. It is built to scale for 5,000 users. It is not really a limit, but 5,000 or less is where it performs well.

Their technical support is good.

Our clients have used legacy systems, homegrown systems, and other ERP solutions.

It is complex. In terms of deployment, you can get it all up and running within a month, but its implementation is a long process. It depends on the size of the organization and the number of processes they're trying to implement. So, implementations can take anywhere from six months to two years, depending on how big the organization is.

The number of staff required for deployment and maintenance depends on the implementation. In terms of their roles, there are system admin and developers. Then there are application consultants or business analysts. They are the people who have expertise in a particular domain such as financials, supply chain, or manufacturing. So, it depends on the different processes that you are going to set up in JD Edwards. You could have an organization that is only implementing financials, and in that case, you only need one financial SME, but if you have an organization that is going to implement financials, manufacturing, and supply chain, you're going to need SMEs for these areas.

It depends on the number of users and the modules that you want to buy. It is licensed on a perpetual license basis. You buy the license costs upfront, and then there is maintenance for support that you pay every year, which is typically about 20%.

The expense also depends on an organization's IT strategy, such as whether they're going to support the system internally or whether they're going to get an external vendor like my company to help support it.

Make sure that you have the right strategy on whether you're going to support it internally or you're going to hire an external vendor for it. It needs a specialized skill set; it is not something that anyone can just support.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. This is based on what I've heard from my customers and people who use other solutions. I haven't worked with too many other products to give a fair comparison.