JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Reviews

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.

The most valuable feature would be the fact that it is a ERP system that has all of its modules fully integrated without the use of middleware. We use the manufacturing modules extremely heavily.

We have multiple business segments and JD Edwards allows us to integrate modules across those segments. It gives us a seamless communication process, if you will. It's been a choice of management that we use single-source JD Edwards. We try not to go find best-of-breeds, but if it's in JD Edwards, use it.

This is an interesting question because they've been making improvements continuously over the last 25 years. That's one of the things that has caused JD Edwards to sustain itself. Where they might be able to make added improvements are probably in specialized features. If you have something that is a specialized industry use, then focus more on that. Just like this last year, the Oil & Gas SIG got together and they said, "Well, people who do downhole drilling, they do rental tools. They actually need a module that would enable them to be able to rent assets." So the SIG put together a proposal to Oracle for a developed rental tools module. Oracle heard them and they actually took it and they put it together, so in release 9.1, there is a petroleum-based rental tool module.

I've been using it for 28 years. I started on 34 and I was using JD Edwards, so I've been through 34, 36, 38, AS/400, Windows Platform.

We had the normal amount of bugs that you'd have when you roll something out. They have a fairly good change management process and a process for being able to roll out bug fixes. We get constant notification for things that are done that will make improvements. They are all taken advantage of, if we so choose.

They've been continuously improving the stability over the last 25 years.

We own all licenses for our SIG-code industry. Everything that has to do with oil & gas and chemicals, we own all the modules. We've expanded to the point where we've bought everything. We're able to scale without any issue.

Technical support is very good.

JD Edwards is a configurable software solution. They provide you with the ability to be able to configure the software so that you can run your business in the manner that you choose. It could be summarized to say, "You don't have to change the way you run your business to run with the software. It's the opposite. The software wraps around your business." It's as complex or as straightforward as you make it.

Make sure you get reference checks. Check with other companies that are using the software in the manner in which you would like to use it for. What were their pitfalls? What are their successes? How well has it resounded, once it's been implemented for two years, five years? A lot of software works well the first go around, but they fail after that, so you want to make sure.

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.

I like JD Edwards as I was in on the ground floor with it. I learned it from the bottom up, so I think it's easy to use. I know how to navigate around it and to find everything I need, as opposed to having to go outside the system and the way we've set it up in our company.

If you're honest about it, users are never 100% happy. They always think, "oh, this was better than that," but it's hard to come up with one single thing or a couple of small things.

We've done customizations within JD Edwards that aren't part of the out-of-the-box solution. This is one area that could be improved -- the features that can be changed to fit your own organization.

We went live with JD Edwards about nine years ago in March of 2007.

I don't recall having any issues with deployment. As far as I can remember, it deployed without issues.

As far as stability goes, there's been the occasional downtime, but not anything that we haven't been able to handle beyond our scheduled outages, and those usually run fairly consistently.

About a year ago, we did an upgrade where we brought on two new facilities, so we had two existing plant locations and we upgraded our system and then brought them all online within a month. We added probably double the amount of users within a month and we didn't experience any system downtime as a result. As far as I know, they might have and not told us. I was still a user at that time. So, from my perspective, we've had no issues with scalability.

I have not personally used technical support, but I haven't heard anything negative from the team that has.

We were on an AS/400 system prior to this. Then the company that owned us at the time had to get off of that system and bring it on to a new system and they decided to go with JD Edwards.

I don't know as I wasn't involved in the setup. I haven't heard that it was particularly complex.

You have to consider all options, but you have to know your business well, that is, what you're processes are and how the software will best fit your business needs in the most straightforward way. If you're in a manufacturing facility and you only make five products, and you don't need a lot of customization because you're more specialized, it might be easier. I think that's a big thing to know, know your requirements and what you're looking for to make sure that the software will fit within your business requirements.

Proven Warehouse management software available now from Oracle. There are a large number of installations and the software covers most aspects of warehouse and inventory management. You can get all standard features from picking and packing lists to label printing and interfaces to shipping companies like UPS and Fedex.

The software is highly modular and thereby exposes the risk of different implementation choices for each module. Some customization is needed for scanning devices which may be different at each installation. Since it is a package software, the number of database objects are too many and their names are very cryptic.

Overall a good software and allows for a quick operational setup. Try to choose Linux operating system setup for all it's modules. It is quite difficult to find many experienced people trained to handle JD Edwards implementation. Works well with other Oracle software like PeopleSoft.