What is our primary use case?
In various domains, I've witnessed the utilization of GP. For instance, educational institutions continue to offer GP as an option, and more recently, I've collaborated with many individuals involved in e-commerce businesses. They often operate through their websites or marketplaces like Amazon, and they find GP to be a seamless solution. This is because GP boasts a well-developed integration platform that allows for easy integration of all master data and transaction data. Additionally, individuals engaged in the IT sector also find GP appealing, particularly due to its robust project accounting module. In my experience, these groups of people tend to prefer using GP as their choice of software.
What is most valuable?
In terms of features, GP offers a wide range of strong capabilities, particularly in the financial module. Moreover, the sales and distribution modules are robust, and reliable, and seldom encounter issues. Customizations and integration are well-executed in GP, providing a solid foundation for building various additional models. Many users have leveraged GP to create their own models and seamlessly integrate them into the system. These features are undeniably strong points of GP.
The advantages are consistent, and the most significant one is reliability. In North America, the analytics within GP are notably straightforward and user-friendly. The interface is intuitive, resembling the familiar look and feel of Windows and integrating seamlessly with Microsoft Office. This user-friendliness is a key reason people prefer using it. Additionally, I've noticed that individuals often choose to work with .NET specific functionalities within GP.
What needs improvement?
In GP, there are certain features like financial reporting that aren't part of the core GP package. Users might need to install additional components for these features. For example, there's a reseller product called Management Reporter, but many users would prefer to have the reporting capabilities integrated within GP itself, rather than relying on external tools.
The manufacturing module in GP is quite basic, and those who require more advanced manufacturing capabilities often turn to third-party modules or tools. Additionally, you might be aware that in 2028, GP is expected to reach its end of life. Microsoft has already ceased selling GP to new customers. It's essentially the same product, but this marks the final year for GP's availability.
For how long have I used the solution?
Dynamics GP is a highly popular ERP platform for small and modern businesses, and I primarily work with clients in the USA, specifically in North America. I've observed that the common trend involves businesses migrating from QuickBooks to GP. This software, which I've been using for the past two decades, offers a wide range of functionalities. For instance, the sales and distribution module is particularly popular. Many e-commerce businesses prefer using GP because it provides seamless integration, making it their preferred choice.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
As I previously mentioned, GP is quite exceptional. It's the first multi-user ERP in North America, which is a significant distinction. Before GP, there weren't any multi-user ERPs originating from the United States. There were alternatives like SAP, but they weren't US-based. GP began with a basic version, the DAF version, and has been meticulously maintained by Microsoft.
I would definitely rate it a ten, considering I've used it in various ways, and its scalability has been consistently upheld.
How are customer service and support?
Microsoft's technical support is outstanding, although it comes at a high cost. Nowadays, many GP users prefer to handle their support internally. As an alternative, they seek assistance from external resources rather than opting for Microsoft's services, which are expensive not just for GP but for various other Microsoft products as well.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Business Central is another Microsoft product, and Microsoft is actively encouraging GP users to transition to Business Central. This push is driven by the fact that, as mentioned earlier, in 2028, Microsoft plans to cease support for GP. They have already begun pushing their clients towards adopting Business Central. I have hands-on experience with Business Central as well.
How was the initial setup?
GP requires installation either on an in-house server or a hosted server. In either case, you need just one SQL server. For smaller companies, a single server is sufficient, combining the SQL server and GP. Some individuals even opt for installing GP on multiple desktops or laptops, which is an older way of using GP. However, even larger companies still prefer this approach. It involves using an RDP mechanism, allowing multiple users to access and utilize GP on the same system.GP is not a cloud-based ERP. It's always installed on the user's server and infrastructure. Therefore, individuals or organizations that opt for GP need to cover the costs of hardware. They must either purchase their own hardware or host it on-premises or through other platforms.
Recently, I've come across individuals who offer subscription-based models for GP. However, even in these cases, the users are responsible for their hardware and allocate resources for their subscription business. It's important to note that GP is not a cloud-based software.
What about the implementation team?
The duration of GP implementation varies significantly depending on the company's size and its specific requirements, especially in terms of integrations and other factors. I've been involved in GP implementations that were as short as two weeks for small setups, while the largest ones could seemingly go on indefinitely. It's a dynamic process. For instance, during my time at Outdoor Network, a company in the outdoor business, I worked with them for six years, and they kept implementing new features and refining existing ones throughout that period. So, the timeline ultimately depends on how people wish to utilize GP and the ongoing developments they pursue.
The maintenance interface involves regular additions of new features on ServiceStack, as well as the implementation of hot fixes and localized updates, such as those related to taxation. These patches are released periodically.
What was our ROI?
In the US, many individuals and businesses are effectively using GP, and it unquestionably delivers a return on investment. It's proven to be a profitable solution, even for those managing multi-billion dollar enterprises. This showcases its capacity to handle comprehensive infrastructure and operations.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Comparatively, Business Central appears to be more cost-effective. Microsoft offers Business Central at only $70 per user per month in the US. In contrast, GP requires an initial investment, including around $9,000 for the GP license for three users and additional expenses for hardware. Therefore, the initial investment for GP is quite substantial. On the other hand, cloud-based ERP products like Business Central do not entail the same upfront investment and operate on an ongoing, subscription-based model.
What other advice do I have?
I don't personally advise people to use it, but given Microsoft's decision to discontinue GP support, it's better to transition to Business Central instead of starting fresh with GP.
I would rate it an eight because Business Central is an excellent choice for small and mid-sized businesses. However, larger businesses with more extensive needs may find it unsuitable, as they often require advanced features such as those offered by ECP, which is a highly secure product with numerous configuration options and capabilities not available in GP.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
