What advice do you have for others considering IFS Applications?

I recommend IFS Cloud for its value for money and comprehensive feature set. However, potential users should be aware of reporting tool limitations and consider how these may impact their operations. I rate it a seven out of ten.

The solution's deployment is dependent on the regions. In some regions, companies prefer a cloud environment, but in heavy industry and factories where the manufacturing of products is done, they deploy it on-premises. For the customer, the tool is very scalable and easy to use.

The number of people required for the maintenance of the product actually depends on the specifics of the project for which the solution is used. The biggest impact related to the product is in terms of the footprint of the solution, especially when considering how much of the solution a user really uses, and it can vary from project to project. It is a really functional and good product. It is a very good ERP system, and if you implement it correctly, it is a very capable solution. I rate the overall product a ten out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine-point five out of ten. I recommend the solution. IFS is half as expensive as solutions from SAP, though it's much better.

Based on my experience, I suggest exploring products like SAP before deciding on IFS Applications. Choosing a solution that best fits the organization's needs is more important rather than solely opting for IFS Applications. I rate the overall solution a seven and a half out of ten.

IFS is the best ERP solution for production companies.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. We use the enterprise license which includes the maintenance fee. We do the maintenance by ourselves since we have experience in database and application services. There are around four people involved in the maintenance where three would be for support and the rest of them in projects. I would advise anyone looking to use the solution to make use of initial consultancy as much as possible. Try to get the best consultants who can accelerate your knowledge from the beginning. Also, don’t go for the new releases too fast.

I rate IFS Applications seven out of 10. You need to hire the right employees if you want to use IFS because there aren't many IFS consultants out there. It's hard to find someone who knows IFS and they tend to be irreplaceable. Another thing is that the IFS documentation is often incomplete. They sell their product before it's 100% finished.

I rate IFS Applications eight out of 10. I have been using it for 14 years, so they're doing something right.

I'm part of the IFS life sciences roundtable, there has been no emphasis on a life science-specific model. As an example, SAP, they have a pharma-approved template that you can use for the business. We had to develop our own documentation, our own testing, and our own strategy for getting it approved by FDA and MHRA. Something that I think they are missing the trick because if they were to have a life science-centric solution, they could be opening up too much better markets, especially around the big players, such as big pharma. I am a member of the IFS life sciences roundtable, and we have not seen a focus on a life science-specific model. For instance, SAP has a pharma-approved template that can be used for business purposes. However, we had to create our own documentation, testing, and approval strategy for the FDA and MHRA. I believe this is a missed opportunity for IFS, as a life science-focused solution could potentially access larger markets, particularly within the pharmaceutical industry. Everyone that I speak to uses SAP because for this reason. It's difficult to maintain. We have to maintain it now, but the documentation and the whole application life cycle around a life science or GXP would be huge. I rate IFS Applications a six out of ten.

I would rate IFS as nine out of ten. My advice is to use IFS as intended. Don't go off the path. Really consider your business practices. Can they be changed? Is there a reason why they can't be modified slightly? Is the end result going to be the same? Those types of things sometimes cause people to get modifications that don't get them very far. If I was going to change jobs, they would have to be using IFS.

IFS Applications is very user-friendly and easy to deploy, and it's suitable for small and medium enterprises. However, I would advise that user training and support are essential to ensure users get the hang of the product. I would give IFS Applications a rating of six out of ten.

I would rate IFS as five out of ten.

I would tell potential users that they need to consider change management because there could be a lot of resistance from the end-users because of the complexity of running this application. The output is very advanced, but you would really need to put in some effort to achieve that. On a scale from one to ten, I would give IFS Applications a seven.

Definitely, I would recommend this solution to others. The solution from IFS is one of the best solutions and I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We have to work with the latest version of the solution. However, there are some clients who are working on the old versions and they want to perform on the new versions. Occasionally, there is conversion onto new versions. Along with the digital transformation, clients are especially in the manufacturing sector. They want some kind of new technology to come up and add some value to them. That's a part of the journey for digital transformation. We are currently exploring the cloud, even though we mostly work with the on-premises deployment model. The solution is suitable for all sizes of business. We have solution working for big clients as well as for small, growing clients. Overall, I would recommend the solution. It's one of the best on the market and is well known. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Definitely consider this offering. There are many features and options that come with it that don't require custom dev. They upgrade and are supported.

My corporate office has a relationship with IFS. There is a joint venture with one of our implementation partners. We might be using an older version of the solution. I don't believe it's the latest version. I'd like other organizations to know that the solution is very friendly and easy to upgrade. You can update it right through the screen if you need to. If an organization needs a solution capable of generating lots of reports, this solution fits the bill. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'm a consultant. I have clients that use the solution. We use the on-premises deployment model. Typically, we deal with large-scale enterprises like banks. The solution is very good. My advice to people going with Assyst is that you need to make your process clear, as it is an architectural model product. Whatever you ask them to configure Axios will configure. That means you need to be clear about what process you want to configure and how the workflow should be. Then you just make sure you maintain it properly to keep it stable. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Apart from the pressures of meeting 14 go-live dates, this has been a very positive experience and has led to a streamlined and effective business.

Based on what I know, I would rate Assyst as an eight out of ten.

if you do not care about user interface and want a tool to apply ITIL Processes so you can use assyst