We performed a comparison between IBM Maximo and IFS Cloud Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are very thankful to have IBM integrated with our own Legacy cloud-based system"
"Maximo is very stable. We really do not have problem with stability."
"Reliable, very configurable, and it's all integrated in the same database."
"IBM Maximo is a very strong and powerful tool in the market…Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We were able to scale perfectly."
"It can be particularly useful for power line operations, enabling linemen in the field to gather information and send it across the country as well as different parts of the world."
"There are not many enterprise asset management systems on the market and not many that have the categories that IBM Maximo has."
"Provides great flexibility."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"The solution overall is very versatile and flexible, especially compared to other products."
"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."
"The best feature is the maintenance module, which is essentially an industry-specific workflow designed with a manufacturing module as per industry standards. It's very precise and specific without having complex functionalities. It's straightforward. Field Service Management is definitely a wonderful product that IFS has developed because it caters to field services. The energy and utility sectors can answer their business needs using the software."
"When it comes to financing, the solution has helped us to concentrate finance functions like accounting processes in one system. This includes about 70 internal entities around the world."
"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."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"What I like about IFS Applications is that it's easier to use and implement than SAP. I also like that the IFS Applications team is more flexible than the SAP team."
"The mobile solution has a lot of room for improvement, especially in geopositioning capabilities, tracking capabilities, and configuration capabilities, in order to let the tech operate online and offline."
"The solution is not stable. We can have one day when it is stable and another day it is not. Sometimes it crashes or becomes very slow, and there are times we are not even able to download all the databases. Without the database, we cannot work on that application. These are the small glitches, and stability issues we are facing."
"You can get lost using the application"
"It's not user-friendly. It could use shortcuts for frequently requested services."
"Areas for improvement include: an enhanced Service Catalog on Mobile; Agent intelligence; better dashboards for KPIs."
"It's quite reliable, but new versions often are not too stable. They bring in enhancements but they break other stuff."
"Areas for improvement would be the user interface and support for Arabic. They could also be more customer-oriented."
"On a scale of one to ten, where ten is easy and one is difficult, I rate the setup process a two since it is very complicated."
"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."
"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."
"Some kind of bot assistance, some kind of artificial intelligence to help people solve the problems, would be interesting."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex...The technical support my company receives from the implementation partners of the solution is not that great."
"An area for improvement would be transactions, which can be tedious to complete as the process is very complex."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"There should be some improvements in the predefined templates in IFS Applications."
"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."
IBM Maximo is ranked 1st in Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) with 23 reviews while IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) with 29 reviews. IBM Maximo is rated 8.0, while IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Maximo writes "Work order management and scalability enables the businesses' needs to be met". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IFS Cloud Platform writes "Robust, customizable, and modern". IBM Maximo is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, ABB Ability Asset Suite EAM, NetSuite ERP and Oracle Enterprise Asset Management, whereas IFS Cloud Platform is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle E-Business Suite, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and ServiceNow. See our IBM Maximo vs. IFS Cloud Platform report.
See our list of best Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) 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.