How Infor Syteline Will “Always” Beat QAD Enterprise Applications 2007 (a.k.a. MFG/PRO) – Detailed

Hello!

I know that the subject is quite strong to some readers and arrogance is somewhat the first word that might be tagged to it. However, i believe that after reading this detailed comparison of Infor’s SyteLine and QAD’s Enterprise Applications 2007 (a.k.a. MFG/PRO) technology comparison/limitations – you will somehow agree, up to some extent what my point would be. On the term “Always” in my subject line, this is only my personal opinion if in case SyteLine would be in an account with QAD, it will still boils down to the salesperson, presales and the evaluator on how each plays their role.

To those who already visited this site and read my post about “Syteline wins Treasure Island (Cebu) over Oracle and QAD” – this is a 95% replica to it. I just changed the subject and modified some information for it to be more applicable and advantageous to our current evaluators. It will also be best if you also visit this recent post “Infor SyteLine vs Exact Macola vs QAD MFG/PRO”

As evaluators (you as readers), you will still need to verify the content of this article, QAD might have sudden changes on their system or the information that they have in their website just needs further clarifications.

The full burden of evaluation will still be in the hands of the evaluator for verifications. This article is just a guide, not a basis for your selection.

POINT 1

QAD Extends Solution Suite to Microsoft Platform. Business Wire, May 9, 2006.

To serve even more of the world’s manufacturers, QAD Inc., a leading provider of enterprise applications for global manufacturers, is now shipping its flagship ERP software with a Microsoft .NET Framework-based user interface and will offer support for Microsoft SQL Server 2005 database technology in the near future. As a result of close collaboration with Microsoft, current and future releases of the QAD software suite will take advantage of the Microsoft platform.

The extension will help manufacturers worldwide make the most of their technology investments, whether they are planning to deploy the latest QAD ERP suite, Global Enterprise Edition, QAD GXE into an IT environment standardized on the Microsoft platform or extending their present QAD implementation to new sites using Microsoft database technology. In both cases, customers can expect seamless operation across sites using a mix of Microsoft and other database and platform technologies

http://preview.tinyurl.com/39c684

Conclusion: QAD recognizes that .NET is the future. For them to somehow look in that deficiency they have only managed to create a UI (user interface) not the full .NET created application. QAD’s front and backend is Progress.

POINT 2

QAD’s MFG/PRO Deficiencies vs Infor’s SyteLine:

1. Drag and Drop to MS Excel to Application (vice versa)

2. Progress based, maybe a technology limitation “NOT .NET”. This is why Syteline moved to .NET from Progress

3. APS is not fully integrated. Need to buy from ADEXA or their “The Planner”. SYTELINE’s APS is tightly integrated with core ERP. This will also entail additional costs on Progress modules and additional man-days for services

4. Forms personalization not available. This is done thru an EXPERT PROGRESS PROGRAMMER. Just to add a field already needs modification. Every move is a modification.

5. Report Builder is the standard report writing tool (may have limited functions). Not as flexible as Crystal Report writer.

6. Workflow automation may not be included

8. Progress is not a common knowledge vs Microsoft. Skills availability is a constraint. Progress programmers costs higher and harder to find. Turnover is a problem. To be independent with progress, this will be a problem. (May depend on which country you belong)

9. Find/filtering options is less compared to Syteline.

10. A customer must be trained to 3 language sets – JAVA, .NET and with PROGRESS

11. User Interface priority is not clear. Character? JAVA? .NET? PROGRESS?
POINT 3 (Reference can be found in the internet)

To be “AT PAR” with Syteline (without additional modules) using QAD. A customer must buy these additional modules/extentions for QAD. Not mention other pre-requisite requirements of the Progress Platform: (Syteline already has this modules “as standard offering” on the base software. No need to install separately.)

1. QAD .NET UI provides a rich client framework for QAD Applications—giving users state-of-the-art user interface features, such as ad hoc management of windows, tree view menus and drag-and-drop capabilities.

2. QXtend simplifies the transfer of data between QAD products and also simplifies the import and export of data between QAD products and other enterprise external systems.

3. QAD Desktop provides quick and easy access to the full functionality of MFG/PRO and within a Web browser, in an intranet environment.

4. Q/LinQ is a developer’s toolkit for enabling the exchange of data between MFG/PRO applications and/or other external applications.

5. Data Synchronization is a flexible solution with processes that can be deployed to automatically replicate critical data across sites, domains, and databases within an enterprise.

6. QAD Production Scheduler is a Web-based application that increases scheduling efficiency by leveraging MFG/PRO demand, supply and MRP data from several report, inquiry, and maintenance screens into a single screen.

7. The Planner provides finite capacity planning and scheduling tools for managing production through capacity-constrained resources.

POINT 4 (Reference can be found in the internet)

Support by Progress for the Microsoft .Net Client

An important feature within the OpenEdge Release 10 product that allows for native support of Microsoft .NET is the ProDataSet. The ProDataSet provides mapping between a set of database tables or other data sources and can be passed from one procedure to another as a single object. It can be shared with .NET and other open technologies and maps directly on to a Microsoft ADO (ActiveX Data Objects). ADO is a Component object model object for accessing data sources. It provides a layer between programming languages and databases, which allows a developer to write programs which access data, without knowing how the database is implemented. Progress’ support for the .NET client is the major reason why the next generation User Interface for MFG/PRO is based on .NET and it leverages much of the existing Progress technology that allows a seamless integration between the .NET environment and the Progress environment.

Conclusion: QAD is not native .NET. only interfaced!

POINT 5 (Reference can be found in the internet)

Refactoring efforts with Progress

QAD is currently migrating its application architecture towards a full Service-Oriented Architecture model. This effort entails refactoring and restructuring existing code to remove dependencies on the user interface. Numerous efforts are underway to discover the most cost effective and highest quality means of this refactoring effort. Progress Software has been involved with this effort in cooperation with QAD engineers. They see this as an opportunity to learn from us and help their other customers in their migration efforts as well. Again, another example of the proactive collaboration between the two companies.

Conclusion: QAD is currently redesigning, meaning, the end result could be a different product at the end of the exercise. This could lead to an another upgrade, re-installation or reimplementation. And will still be Progress.

POINT 5

Why Infor Syteline over QAD’s Enterprise Applications 2007 (a.k.a. MFG/PRO)?

1. Latest .NET Microsoft Technology => Choosing Syteline will already equip the customer a base technology for at at least for the next 10 years.

2. Strong global operations comparing with Infor’s Operations.

3. Concurrent User

4. After measuring its business process being fitted to any specific customer; Example – 95% Fit – the remaining deficiency can be done thru personalization to complete its 100% fitness. All can be done internally by the SyteLine customer.

5. Microsoft skillset is easy to find

6. It was also clear that Syteline’s Customizability on almost all posible areas in the system is already one of the return on investment factors.

7. Features such as Advanced Planning and Scheduling is an indispensable factor that will truly benefit a customer in the long term.

8. Transfer of Technology

9. Having backed up with the #3 global software provider and #1 manufacturing ERP provider, any customer will surely feel comfortable that its system will surely be supported in coming years ahead. QAD is too small compared to Infor.

Note: Anyone can register and can leave a comment if there are any erroneous opinions that I was able to post. I will diligently modify the said post if required. Also, please read the site disclaimer.

How Infor SyteLine Beats SAP and Oracle in Actual Engagements

After all those marketing smokes, campaigns, fancy brochures and other stuffs – it will now come to actual solutions that are really essential to the end customers. Please find time to read this post.

I think this is a much awaited topic/subject for SyteLine’s competition and evaluators globally; and for me, this is a hard subject to write as well.

Some of the information in this post can be seen in SyteLine7.com forums so this is not really a secret. This is where the power of the Internet comes to place and evaluators take very huge advantage.

To add, I also feel that those online evaluation tools that you can find in the Internet are rigged (in my opinion – maybe not all). ERP Vendors who pay huge advertising money to that site are better positioned in their download materials – who knows? Bottom line, nothing beats face to face interaction with ERP Suppliers rather than fully relying on online tools specially if huge money/investment is at stake.

Ok, here we go.

Top 3 SyteLine KO’s:

1. SyteLine’s forms personalization is a very powerful tool that any user (if given access) can do. ALL you see in SyteLine is modifiable. Yes! This is true! Most of the time, users have a tons of wish lists that needs to be served, imagine if all those wish lists can be served by themselves (if given authorization) and not by the vendor or their IT department? With just seconds of navigation, users can add fields, modify the actual look and feel, combine 2 or more forms into 1, create field triggers without the need for heavy programming. Imagine the lowest possible TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) of never ever to call the ERP supplier if you need to change ANYTHING in the system? Imagine all the remaining deficiency of the system can already be done inhouse – to make it 100% fit!

Note: .NET based ERP Solutions can easily do this. Unless those solutions were already updated and offer such functionalities. Please verify to the vendors concerned.

2. SyteLine’s easy interaction with spreadsheets such as Microsoft Excel or open source office applications – please refer to this post.

Note: .NET based ERP Solutions can easily do this. Unless those solutions were already updated and offer such functionalities. Please verify to the vendors concerned.

3. SyteLine’s Constraint Based Planning and Scheduling engine a.k.a. – APS – Advance Planning and Scheduling. Now, this is a knock-out! This is where SyteLine’s domain expertise comes to play. In almost all cases, ERP Solutions only have MRP. Do you know what’s the difference between MRP (Material Resource Planning) and APS (Advance Planning and Scheduling)? here is some of the reasons on why you need to know APS and why you dont hear APS from Non-SyteLine Providers.

a.) MRP uses finite planning while APS uses constraint-based planning even at order entry.
b.) MRP can only check inventory (available-to-promise) but if no stock is available, you have to wait for the MRP run before you can know if you could truly deliver an order.
c.) MRP normally runs at night because you need to freeze inventory (no transaction happening) which means you will not have immediate information of changes to the plans, normally the information will be available the following day already.
d.) APS will check both inventory and capacity, presenting the feasibility of fulfilling a requested order at order entry-point.
e.) Distribution and manufacturing companies nowadays need APS for them to be competitive since at present JIT or Kanban is a must practice at present.

For a Non-SyteLine Solution to be able to compete, they will need to add systems such as those coming from Adexa, or if evaluating SAP – they need to add APO (Advance Planning and Ordering), i2 Technologies – Rhythm, Manugistics – Manugistics supply chain suite, Numetrix – Schedulex, Oracle’s – Oracle APS.

SyteLine’s APS is already integrated in its core system – this is not an add-on meaning – no integration problems – all real-time and in its natural coding.

This is where SAP, Oracle, QAD, Exact, Scala, Microsoft Dynamics (Navision) or any other ERP provider find very hard time to answer, maybe because competency of APS is very hard to find; SyteLine’s APS comes natural in its regular implementations. I just don’t know why Non-SyteLine providers find this complicated.

To know more about APS, please read “The Goal” maybe the second edition is retitled “Theory of Constraints” by “Eliyahu M. Goldratt“. – This was suggested by an APS expert/friend, he is in Malaysia.