SAP S/4HANA Reviews

Mostly I have dealt with project-based manufacturing companies where they do custom product builds, like heavy equipment, compressors, steam turbines, and stuff like that.

S4HANA is a completely integrated solution. It's an end-to-end ERP system with strong manufacturing and financial integration, which is not common among ERPs. And it's a solution that's driven by industry best practices.

Maybe its user interface and reporting can be improved across the board, but it is manageable.

I've been using S4HANA for about 16 years.

S4HANA's stability is good.

S4HANA is pretty scalable. We normally plan three to five years ahead and scale up accordingly. So as long as your sizing is done properly, you're good.

I don't have much experience with SAP's tech support, but I have used the online support system. It's okay for a company the size of SAP. But from a customer perspective, it can be time consuming to get help from them.

Setting up S4HANA is straightforward if you have a little bit of expertise, especially on the S4HANA side. You need to understand the appliances and hardware so you can set requirements for RAM as opposed to storage. If you have some experience in server administration, it's not like climbing a mountain; it's a small trip.

Most of the time, I've been able to quantify the soft savings, like savings in terms of time spent on processes and efficiencies that you gain. FDA reductions are generally difficult to establish over a finite period, but your soft savings are far more rewarding, and it's also more compliance related.

I have not dealt with licensing directly because our head office manages that. We only pay SAP to perform maintenance on the solution instead of doing it in-house. Given the size of an ERP system, you need some extra labor to maintain it, but it's justified if you look at the cost-benefit analysis. Some companies go overboard with hiring many people, and then they say it's too expensive.

I would rate S4HANA 10 out of 10. It's a good solution. I think some companies are penny wise and pound foolish. They invest a lot in other ERPs, and when they start to grow those systems, they create a lot of inefficiencies in the process. 

With our customers, we are currently administering their solution over SAP HANA and with different infrastructures such as cloud computing, AWS, Azure, GCP, and others that are also on-premise.

We have customers with new implementations and we offer this product to them. We handle the technical installation, then the high availability solution, the disaster recovery, et cetera. We are doing the administration of all the landscapes and a sub-basic administration. 

In all the other cases we have, the customers are immigrating their solution from SAP HEC. That is the other server for SAP. We bring it to the cloud with public clouds like AWS. Those cases are the most common.

The cost optimization that is shipped with cloud solutions is the primary benefit of the product. 

The integral services that we can administer to our customers are excellent. They are paying for an all-inclusive version of the service. We manage all the features of the operating system - such as ACE's, SAP systems, networks, security on the cloud, et cetera. We can administer everything that is associated with the landscape.

We're well trained on the solution and therefore find the implementation process straightforward.

The solution is quite stable and offers good patches for when issues arise.

The scalability is excellent, especially on cloud deployment models.

From our point of view, we are just a technology consultant. We look at the interfaces in terms of the functional modules we have. It's hard to really see what would be missing in terms of a feature. 

For clients, the most painful part of the solution is the implementation guides of the business or process applications. Okay. The business scenario, the graphic user interface, shown on the system can be a challenge. 

Maybe the commercial model for some other products developed for HANA could be adjusted to make it less complex and more affordable. The commercial laws that SAP has it's very complex. The customer has to acquire a very high license on the product and then they have to buy infrastructure on top of that.

Technical support has been declining. They aren't as responsive as they used to be.

The product could use some other integrations with leaders of the products with public clouds - especially if they are doing with another staff like ILP or on other applications. There could be more legal applications that could be integrated more easily with SAP than they're doing. Right now, we have to develop all the integrations. It would be so much better if this was already done. 

SAP often launches new solutions without first providing the proper documentation. We end up figuring it out, however, it would be nice to have that documentation up front.

We have approximately 15 years of experience on the books with this solution. We've used it since SAP was not HANA. It's now been with HANA, since 2014, if I recall correctly. Therefore, that may be about seven years of experience. Obviously, we've worked with the product over the last 12 months.

The stability is very good. It's, it's a very, very stable version. SAP is often releasing new patches. If we are having some issues, such as some problems with transactions or maybe some features may not work properly, we reach out to enterprise support and often just get a patch. 

The level of scalability you can achieve depends on the infrastructure that you have installed. In the cloud, in product public sites, it's easier to scale. We can scale both up and out and it's very simple to accomplish. 

Typically, we deal with medium businesses. Some others are large at approximately 5,000 users. Most are between 400 and 800 users.

Technical support used to be better. They seem to be less proactive than they were before. Previously they were very responsive and helpful. It's lagged a bit. We're disappointed their rapid response has declined. We're no longer satisfied with the level of service provided.

For us, the entire process is traditionally straightforward. It's not too complex. We manage it like the other systems in the past and obviously take into consideration any new technology within SAP HANA. However, in terms of setting it up, it's not a problem.

With a big cloud infrastructure, we can set up a system in less than a month. It may take between two to three months to take over the system and put it onto the cloud or on our hardware projects. On-premise it may be longer - sometimes around four months.

How many people you need for deployment and maintenance depends on the number of systems. However, with a team of four to five people we managed to do all the projects. 

We handle the implementation process for our clients.

While our clients may first evaluate other solutions, that's not something that we typically do.

We are experts in the technical implementation of the product.

We work with a variety of versions, and, of course, with eh latest 2020 updates. We deal with both cloud and on-premises deployment models.

I'd advise potential new users to really think about their infrastructure and the features they would like. Everything should be looked at and discussed in advance, from security concerns to functional modules. The more you understand what you need, the more likely you will get a solution that you want - and that does what you need it to.

Overall, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our manufacturing processes, sales, finance, pretty much everything.

They recently restructured the database and changed the table structures, which has made it much easier to manage the processes. The processes have been reduced from almost 10 steps to four or five steps. It's really been simplified.

The theory-side of the solution needs to be improved. They need to come up with a simple way to explain to their customers how to properly use it and perform analysis and move on from there.

In the next release, I would like to see more integration scenarios with the cloud, straight out of the box.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

The stability is good. We noticed some areas, such as health and safety that were not very stable, but the other areas are quite stable and work fine.

The technical support helped us on almost every front.

It depends on what kind of agreement you have with SAP. We have a maximum attention agreement, so it's all good. For a maximum attention agreement, there are some extra charges, but I'm not aware of how much.

The simplicity of the initial setup varies from customer to customer. For us, it was quite complicated because we needed a lot of customization, but in the end, it was ok.

We had a detailed implementation plan that we followed step by step.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven.

It is really fast. It is also very stable.

I'm not a big fan of SAP S/4HANA because it needs a lot of hardware. It is really fast, but it needs a lot of hardware. The hardware for S/4HANA is too expensive.

We have been using it for six months.

It is working fine. It is really stable. We didn't find any issue, but we have been using it only for six months.

It is scalable. We have around 100 users.

We take the first level of support from a partner. They have not been very good. We are thinking of replacing the partner.

It was not straightforward. I took a lot of time to set up S/4HANA. The installation, implementation, and analysis took more than one year.

It is very expensive. It is not cheap.

It is stable, but it is expensive, and it needs a lot of hardware. Next time, we would go for another vendor. In our experience, Oracle is better.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

Because I'm a procure-to-pay consultant, I mostly look at that angle, and I have a bit of experience with sales and distribution. I also like the integration between S/4HANA and other ERPs because S/4HANA is a suite. For example, the integration between S/4HANA and EWM Transportation Management, and Ariba.

The procure-to-pay solution in the Contract Management angle could be better. If you look at it on Ariba, the Contract Management Life Cycle for Ariba is more robust. You can create documentation, SLAs, and NDAs. Apart from the procurement aspect of the contract, you have the legal side, but Ariba cannot do that.

From what I've seen, the features of the procure-to-pay model in S/4HANA and their Contract Life Cycle Management side primarily focus on the procurement side. I believe it would be good if this solution could handle a part of the legal side.

They will incorporate Extended Warehouse Management and Transportation Management into the S/4HANA cloud. Most big companies that use a solution like S/4HANA have a legal department within the organization. Suppose they can incorporate that to be in S/4HANA suites; I think it'll be good. It will be just like what we have with Transportation Management and Extended Warehouse Management.

The user interface could be better. They have too much information on the interface, and our customers still keep complaining that it looks complex. Even though many things have changed, they still complain that the interface or the screen they see is a bit complex. It's only when they see the Fiori interface that their mind becomes a bit calm.

I've been using SAP S4HANA since 2018.

SAP S4HANA is a stable product.

SAP S4HANA is scalable. That's one of the main benefits of using SAP solutions. Most SAP solutions are scalable.

In Nigeria, we have to consider currency conversion rates with the Euro and Dollar that impact the final cost. But I believe that it'll be cheaper in the cloud where SAP has to do the maintenance of the server and more in the long run. 

I would tell potential users that S/4HANA is suitable for big companies. It comes with best practices and handles most processes, be it simple or complex. SAP also has almost 50 years of experience in the supply chain and financial industry. They should go for it, but they should stick to the best practices and not do much customization.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SAP S4HANA an eight.

The most useful features of SAP S4HANA are the consolidation reports. The BI is very strong and the manufacturing and finance sections we like a lot.

I have been using SAP S4HANA for approximately seven years.

The stability of SAP S4HANA is great.

The scalability is very good, this is the reason why people choose SAP S4HANA, You can implement the solution worldwide, in many of the countries.

The technical support is very good.

The install can be difficult. There's something called secondary sales solutions that is not there in SAP. We need to have third-party tools to integrate to do the automatization. The two parts are missing on the secondary sales solution and automation.

SAP S4HANA is a great product. It is a new product but it is not best suited for startup companies. It is for companies that have complex scenarios and who are looking to expand, SAP S4HANA is the best fit for this scenario.

I rate SAP S4HANA a ten out of ten.

My primary use of this solution is for FICO supply, distribution, and inventory.

This solution has reduced our costs because we don't have to pay for a third-party database or replication software.

The most valuable feature is that HANA loads from memory, which means it loads very quickly.

The resource usage could be improved - it's memory-hungry, so mid-range servers struggle to run it.

I've been using this solution for two-and-a-half years.

This is a very stable solution.

This solution is scalable.

The setup wasn't easy because we had some issues with bandwidth while migrating from on-premise to the cloud. We had to temporarily increase our server for the migration to be successful.

The licensing costs are not transparent at all - for example, we pay a 22% annual maintenance fee without really getting any value for it.

I would give this solution a score of eight out of ten.

My primary use case is to create solution architectures, including solutions in the cloud and on-premise.

The most valuable feature is the perfect end-to-end integration.

An area for improvement would be integration with different kinds of legacies. In the next release, I would like the product to be prepared for blockchain technology and the best way to communicate with social networking.

I've been using this solution for nine years.

I'm not aware of any problems with stability.

The scalability is excellent - we can grow with the solution in the medium or long term.

The initial setup is fairly easy.

For me, S/4HANA is the best value solution in the world. I would rate this solution ten out of ten.