We performed a comparison between JD Edwards EnterpriseOne and Microsoft Dynamics GP 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."The solution can scale."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"The solution is stable."
"JD Edwards EnterpriseOne's most valuable feature is its one consolidated platform that runs all the different aspects of companies."
"The solution’s Accounts Payable and Procurement modules are the most stable and quite useful compared to other finance modules."
"The most valuable features of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne are the flexibility of the configuration, it is highly configurable. It is not rigid as other solutions, such as SAP. They have recently added a custom workflow approach and approval workflows."
"With the new versions, it has become very user-friendly. We have integration with mobiles, and we have cloud-based solutions. There are a lot of things that can be done by front-end users without technical knowledge. They can create reports without having to do any coding, and it's very good now."
"I have found the solutions best features to be financial procurement, inventory, and manufacturing."
"It is a tried and tested ERP system which if used correctly, is definitely a very good program for managing all aspects of a business from customer sales, and receivables management, to payable management and finance reporting. So, it's super critical for any mid-sized company."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I haven't used it a lot, but the best thing is that the processes are very detailed."
"The solution is easy to use and not complicated. Also, it is easy to get trained on. Also, there is good information available on the web. The GP community is quite broad and there are many blogs online."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to easily update and maintain accurate data across all aspects of our operations."
"The most valuable feature is financial control. The accounting aspect allows us to manage our clients and payments."
"It is strong in integration."
"The fixed assets, payroll, the data module, and user-friendliness are most valuable."
"The reporting has to be flexible or it will turn the end-user off."
"Originally, there were some complications with implementation."
"The initial setup was complex...One should get the end-user manual because, in some parts, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is not user-friendly."
"Forms customization should be easier. Currently, it has to go through the development life cycle."
"What would make JD Edwards EnterpriseOne better is more straightforward project implementation, including reducing the costs associated with upgrading projects."
"They have been improving it every day, but it could have more automation."
"Financial side could be expanded by bringing in things like the IMS."
"I would like the user experience to be more user-friendly."
"As technology changes, I would say probably in the area of chart up account needs improvement because chart up account is a string. So if they make it more flexible."
"As for room for improvement, they have different modules, project and analytical accounting, but it will be good to have that kind of part in the standard package. To have that additional reporting functionality where you can add an attribute or something, which you can report again. So you can analyze the cost by not just natural accounts but also by a project, without having to go through another module edit on top and then the other module edit on top. The more modules you add, sometimes it doesn't work that well. Additionally, it would be easier to have the solution on the cloud. That's our consideration. We are trying to move all our systems to the cloud, and GP is one of them that we are going to move in the next couple of years. I would rate the solution seven or seven point five out of ten."
"Dynamics GP could be improved in terms of its usability and modernization."
"Initially, we encountered challenges, particularly with users transitioning from their previous applications."
"There should also be extra redundancy when posting to modules. We use different sets of books such as CashBook and CheckBooks therefore if I select the wrong one the solution allows the transaction to just pass without warning."
"It requires a lot of expertise to implement."
"The biggest problem with GP is that it's not cloud based and it doesn't lend itself to subscription licensing. But Microsoft wants everything in the cloud and licensed on a subscription basis.Even tThough GP can be deployed on a cloud server, but basically, it's a Windows based product. It uses the older model and companies purchase the program and pay a 16-18 sixteen- eighteen percent annual renewal fee but Microsoft wants everybody to pay monthly or annual renewal fees on a subscription basis."
"The issue we're encountering is that it's primarily designed for independent installations and not initially structured as a cloud-based solution, which has led to challenges with connectivity."
JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is ranked 7th in ERP with 55 reviews while Microsoft Dynamics GP is ranked 13th in ERP with 22 reviews. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Dynamics GP is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne writes "Simplifies processes, is easy to set up, and offers good integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Dynamics GP writes "A user-friendly solution for accounting and sales purchase model with all options in one frame". JD Edwards EnterpriseOne is most compared with JD Edwards World, Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP, SAP ERP, Oracle E-Business Suite and SAP S/4HANA, whereas Microsoft Dynamics GP is most compared with Microsoft Dynamics AX, Oracle E-Business Suite, Epicor ERP, SAP ERP and SAP S/4HANA. See our JD Edwards EnterpriseOne vs. Microsoft Dynamics GP report.
See our list of best ERP 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.