JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Reviews

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.

The most valuable feature is the scope of functionality that JD Edwards covers. You could start small with something like financials and HR payroll, and you can expand it to be used for asset maintenance, distribution, manufacturing. It also comes with a development tool set so that you can add onto it fairly easily.

It's quite cost-effective in comparison with other ERPs. The rest of them are all expensive.

They could enhance the reporting tools. We've been looking for a joint venture billing solution, which is actually on the road map, so it's coming.

It's very stable. It's been around for 30 years or so. EnterpriseOne came out in the mid-90s, so that makes it over 20 years old, but they continually add new features and functionality all the time.

It's also very good. It runs on different platforms, so you can pick and choose which hardware system you would like for whatever scale of company you are. I used to work for a very large oil company that ran it for about 15,000 people. I know that there's companies larger than that, as well.

I personally haven't used it recently, but folks on my team have, and the answer is always, "It depends." If it's a fairly straightforward answer, they're very good at pointing you to wherever the technical documentation is so that you can look it up yourself again next time. If it's complex, or there's some debate on whether the item is a bug or functioning as designed, it does take quite some time to get through that, and from a customer perspective, sometimes you have to be pretty persistent.

A lot of it is the partnership. Lots of vendors are willing to sell you a product, but then aren't there when something goes wrong. It really needs to be a relationship for the long term when you're looking for the solution, as well as meeting all of the functional requirements that you have.

I would rate it a 9, because it's the best in the ERPs, as far as I'm concerned, but it's never perfect, so it will never be a 10.

Definitely give JD Edwards a chance, and make sure you talk to other JD Edwards customers before you make your decision.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne has different use cases here in Brazil. The solution is used by various different companies, but my company usually works with agribusiness, health, financial, gas and oil companies.

Flexibility is the most valuable aspect of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne because it allows personalization.

I also like the excellent user experience and improved user interface in the newest version of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

What would make JD Edwards EnterpriseOne better is an improvement in the reporting tool.

In the future, I want Oracle to continue investing time in JD Edwards Orchestrator because it provides great improvements to automate business tasks and create integrations easily.

I have sixteen years of experience with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is a stable solution, so it's a ten out of ten in terms of stability.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne scalability is good. You can host the solution on an on-premise machine. You can also install it on the cloud. When you install JD Edwards EnterpriseOne on the cloud, you can scale it whenever, so its scalability level still depends on your architecture and infrastructure.

Regarding scalability, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is a nine out of ten.

The technical support for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is good. My team needs to open a service request, and then support gives my team the answer and resolution, so it's good.

Regarding the initial setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, its difficulty level depends on the size of the company and the business requirements. Still, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is not a complex ERP system to set up.

My company has no complaints about the setup, so it's okay. It's a nine out of ten, setup-wise.

Upgrading projects can make JD Edwards EnterpriseOne costlier, so it needs cost reduction in this area.

My company is an Oracle partner. I have experience with one of the Oracle on-premise ERPs, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne.

I've worked with different versions of the solution, old and new.

Maintaining JD Edwards EnterpriseOne requires at least one technical consultant and two to three functional consultants, depending on the business model. A developer is needed when creating new applications and reports.

I advise anyone planning to use JD Edwards EnterpriseOne to keep it up-to-date because Oracle provides new functionalities, so you should continually update the solution to the latest version. Keep an annual upgrade schedule, so you always have your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne in the upgraded version.

My rating for the solution is ten 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.

We use this product as our ERP solution. We used to handle all of the ERP functions with EnterpriseOne, although we have now moved work orders, purchase orders, and inventory functions into Maximo. We still have AR and AP in EnterpriseOne.

Essentially, we use Maximo for the operations functions and EnterpriseOne for the financial side.

The interface is very user-friendly.

The reporting functionality is good.

We originally used EnterpriseOne for preventative maintenance, but it is not very good at that so we migrated to Maximo for that task.

We have been using JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for quite some time, since 2007.

Stability-wise, this is a very good solution.

The technical support from Oracle is okay.

We have used this product for many years. I have not noticed much difference between version 9.1 and 9.2.

Quite some time ago, I worked with Oracle EBS and it is not as user-friendly as EnterpriseOne.

I cannot set up EnterpriseOne on my own.

We used to use the Data Access Studio (DAS) to extract data from EnterpriseOne, although we now use Oracle OBIEE for that.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

EnterpriseOne's integration could be improved.

I've been using EnterpriseOne for more than twenty years.

EnterpriseOne is stable and can be customized according to customer requirements. 

EnterpriseOne is scalable for large enterprises.

EnterpriseOne is cost-effective for large enterprises.

I wouldn't recommend EnterpriseOne for small enterprises because the cost-benefit doesn't work out. But for large enterprises, it's a very good and cost-effective solution that's competitive with other products like SAP. I would rate EnterpriseOne nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature that I've found is that once it's configured, it's easy to use and maintain from a user standpoint. It's not something you have to keep re-configuring or programming because it breaks often. It's all-around, from implementation and maintenance points-of-view, a nice solution. Historically, JD Edwards is very good at absorbing those types of features into its new product releases.

From an organizational perspective, it obvious that the ease-of-use and ease-of-maintenance aspects of JD Edwards provides us with greater efficiency and, ultimately, cost savings. This is huge for us.

My concern is that it's not keeping pace with what's happening in the real world. Technology's moving on so quickly that the software is struggling to keep up. The company's not really investing enough in the product for additional innovations. For example, it needs to be updated as it looks the same as it did 10 years ago. The UI needs an update and now people are going to buy third-party products more because those are better than JD Edwards at doing specific tasks. Another example of this is that you need to have a third-party tool for reporting and you have to integrate it.

We implemented it in 1999.

The deployment was fairly issues-free. The important part was getting it configured correctly and suitable for our needs.

There are some issues with stability. It's actually hard to get JD Edwards to fix anything anymore. You get the functions as designed a lot of the times, and the user groups struggle to try and get stuff fixed.

It's scalable. You can start with a very small company, add bits to it, and it grows naturally with what your requirements are. Disks are cheap and you can use the same JD Edwards software as you get more complicated. The software gets more complicated with your requirements. It tries to answer everybody's needs as much as it can. You can sit on almost any platform, add more disc, add more users, and the product works very well whether you've got 10, 100, or 1000. Obviously, there's a cost associated with that, but straight out of the box, it's a very scalable tool.

It's relatively straightforward to configure. We only wanted core financials at the time. We've grown since then, and as we've acquired more companies. As our business has grown, we have added a lot more to the solution and a lot more complexity. And we've been able to do that quite efficiently over the years, and that's one of the good things about JD Edwards. You don't have to keep revisiting the box and  the instruction manual, because you can just add stuff as you go.

It's a good attempt at answering everybody's needs. You can never be perfect on every piece of application. JD Edwards, for the last 30 years, has tried its best to be as much of an answer to everything you require, and they've done a very good job of it. 

Any leg work you can do at the beginning to prepare your organization, your executives, and the information that you need to get out of a software company would benefit you greatly. All of that work pays dividends in the long run. You don't get surprises, you don't get led down the garden path by somebody who thinks they know better. 

Talk to people. Talk to as many people as you can. Come to user groups. Be a prospective customer. It's all about that preparation work. Even if you have to recruit somebody into your business that's done it before, it's all about finding that information to begin with.

Our primary use case is for accounting, budgeting, project costs, and all cost-related financial purposes.

I have found their budgeting and financial inquiries are easy to work with. It is easy to inquire about any account in our company. They are good with financial and accounting platforms.

From my perspective sometimes it is glitchy.  We have to close the application and restart the computer. It does not submit the inquiry as requested. 

I have been working with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for the past nine months.

I have found the stability matches our current expectations.

We are having a few issues with scalability bringing other individuals into the same purchase order. This is something that needs to be improved.

It is straightforward. I learned it in a week to ten days and I am doing the purchasing orders as well.

I would rate JD Edwards EnterpriseOne a nine out of ten.