We performed a comparison between IFS Cloud Platform and JD Edwards EnterpriseOne based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ERP solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of our favorite features is the "Info-Zone", which provides operational intelligence in flight and in context to guide both business users and support teams to productivity."
"The most valuable features of IFS Applications are their intuitiveness and ease of use. The navigations are also straightforward, which makes it easy to train users. The feedback I always receive is that it is very user-friendly."
"The financial posting controls are quite handy. The user interface is really friendly, highly flexible, and pretty intuitive for end users."
"All the modules are valuable in their own right, but everything has to go through the ERP. IFS has done an excellent job integrating the various modules to complete these processes. My expertise is in the finance module, but I have used the other verticals. It's an all-around good product."
"Some of the strengths are Enterprise Management Solutions and the series of Management solutions which is number one in Gartner's report and has been for the last five years."
"IFS Applications' best feature is the user-friendly interface that has a .NET Framework application in the front end and an Oracle database and WebLogic middleware."
"There tends not to be a massive weakness in the product itself, as weaknesses can quickly be resolved in the next patch or the next release."
"We could quickly understand what was going on and what the customer wanted to do."
"We find the ease of use, customization, and user interface valuable."
"It’s a stable product."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"JD Edwards EnterpriseOne has improved within all the solutions and there have been a lot of investments by Oracle in these solutions. Most of the functionalities, and business requirements, are available for the system in the solution and there have been enhancements to the processes, UI, and tools, which have been done on a regular basis."
"We did not have any problems with the scalability of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne."
"There are numerous good features."
"Its user interface and ease of navigation are valuable."
"The product can scale."
"I'm a business analyst, so I do a lot of customer-facing work. I take calls from businesses I have to troubleshoot. One thing that bugs me is the error messages you get from IFS. If I get an error message, I have to dig to find the cause because, often, the error message doesn't precisely describe the problem. It'll hint about where the problem lies, but you have to work to find the root cause. It doesn't help in my situation. You expect an error message to point to the field or what is causing the issue."
"IFS uses Crystal Report mostly, which isn't too user-friendly. Developing reports isn't easy and requires a lot of dev time. Since SAP bought it, Crystal Report has become more complicated to use on IFS. You have a dashboard for reporting that is good, but it's incomplete. Most of our clients use Power BI or some additional tooling for BI."
"I have seen that one of the areas that my company has identified for improvement might be the rental management capabilities within the solution."
"Customization needs to be improved."
"An area for improvement would be transactions, which can be tedious to complete as the process is very complex."
"We would like to see AI-driven CSI functions built into the tool that would allow us to quickly tie our improvement goals to metrics and activities, so Assyst will suggest the next steps to help us get closer to our goals."
"The user interface can be improved. When you're clicking through the screens, there are some icons or symbols that really need updating and would be more useful and noticeable if they are aesthetically pleasing."
"We have upgraded to the latest version right now. We have issues with the quality. We tried to enroll in their Evergreen program which was meant to help us adopt any service update or anything that the tool’s providers come up with."
"The solution could be easier to implement. However, the complexity was in our internal processes meeting our country's requirements. Every country has a slightly different process, taxation, and rules. That was the difficult part, not the solution itself. I expect our experience would have been more or less the same with any ERP, such as SAP, Navision, or Dynamics."
"Needs better integration with IoT solutions."
"If they can research and make the installation part easier or more user-friendly, it would be nice."
"They need to improve the logs and need to write some sort of script that clears logs after so many days."
"It does not submit the inquiry as requested. We have to close the application and restart the computer."
"I haven't come across any downsides just yet."
"The initial setup of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is straightforward. However, it could improve."
"EnterpriseOne's integration could be improved."
IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 9th in ERP with 29 reviews while JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is ranked 7th in ERP with 55 reviews. IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8, while JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IFS Cloud Platform writes "Robust, customizable, and modern". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne writes "Simplifies processes, is easy to set up, and offers good integrations". IFS Cloud Platform is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle E-Business Suite, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and NetSuite ERP, whereas JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is most compared with JD Edwards World, SAP ERP, Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP, PeopleSoft and Infor M3. See our IFS Cloud Platform vs. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne report.
See our list of best ERP vendors and best Activity Based Costing Software vendors.
We monitor all ERP reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.