JD Edwards World Reviews

JD Edwards World is used for almost everything, with multi-skilling across all the modules.

The most valuable feature in JD Edwards World is World Writer, the reporting functionality. Inventory management in JD Edwards World is useful and it helps with supply chain as long as the setup is done correctly.

JD Edwards World's key point for improvement is to be more digitally enabled. It also needs to assist all the different industries more than it currently does. The lack of functionality in JD Edwards World compared to EnterpriseOne includes a lot of web-based functions that do not exist in World at all.

I have been working with JD Edwards World for ten to fifteen years.

I would rate the stability of JD Edwards World at about six.

I would rate JD Edwards World's scalability at a four. It is not really because it is on-premises; it is just that the functionality in World is different from EnterpriseOne, so it is not very scalable.

I used to be a customer of Oracle, but for the last fifteen years, I have been a consultant and a partner with them.

The setup process for JD Edwards World and EnterpriseOne is exactly the same, except in EnterpriseOne there are a few more digital and cloud-based functionalities that do not exist in World. The integration with other applications such as SAP, Sage, or Microsoft Dynamics has APIs that are not really existent in World, whereas they do exist in EnterpriseOne.

The setup is very similar for both JD Edwards World and EnterpriseOne, with just additional functionalities for EnterpriseOne.

The pricing for JD Edwards World depends on your hardware and operating system, which might differ. I think the pricing for EnterpriseOne is much better than for World because it is more flexible.

In JD Edwards World, the size is limited compared to EnterpriseOne. I would rather move to EnterpriseOne on-premises; you do not have to move to cloud and then stay on World, as World is very outdated and not really supported anymore.

I am currently working with both solutions, JD Edwards World and EnterpriseOne, combining their products. JD Edwards EnterpriseOne provides me with main benefits such as being digitally enabled, where I have all the transformation and digital transformation tools embedded such as IoT and the scheduling of transactions for technical data.

JD Edwards World's real-time data analytics is very limited, and while it can be helpful, it is not the same as EnterpriseOne. I am currently using inventory management in JD Edwards World. I am satisfied with the security architecture in JD Edwards World; it is very easy and user-friendly. Even in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, it is very adaptable and you have role-based security without needing additional software. I am totally satisfied with the security part of JD Edwards World, but you must just know what you are doing. I am currently using on-premises JD Edwards World.

My final mark for JD Edwards World is about five; I think it was good for when it lasted, quite a few years ago, but it is very outdated now. Therefore, the way to go is EnterpriseOne or cloud. For current usage, I would rate JD Edwards World maybe a five. My overall review rating for JD Edwards World is five out of ten.

Neutral

I have two different kinds of customers. One produces mass market goods like toilet paper and similar products. The other operates in the food environment, producing food packages for retailers. Both customers use JD Edwards World in their infrastructure, implementing it on-premises rather than on the cloud.

In my use cases, JD Edwards World offers flexibility in listing capabilities. It allows various types of list prices depending on the channel or customer, enabling users to apply complex discount structures such as discounts on discounts. This intricate structure of commercial conditions for sales is highly appreciated by my customers. 

Additionally, JD Edwards World supports AI initiatives, enhancing financial operations by automating tasks like payment and invoice recognition without manual entry. 

Overall, its flexibility and technological capabilities make it very valuable for my customers.

The flexibility and ability to integrate external applications are increasingly vital. For instance, integrating Salesforce with JD Edwards or SAP ERP provides significant power. The ERP system should not be closed or difficult to integrate with other packages. 

Furthermore, having tools that allow for small but fast adaptations of packages is crucial, as needing skilled programmers for every minor report or mask adaptation is a constraint my customers no longer favor.

I have been working with JD Edwards World for roughly five years as an integrator.

JD Edwards World is very stable. I would rate its stability as eight out of ten, which indicates a high level of reliability and stability, surpassing many other ERPs. This stability is crucial, especially for production companies.

I would rate its scalability as seven out of ten. There are always improvements that can be made, so a score of seven is quite high but acknowledges room for enhancement.

For ERP systems, service involves two levels: product support from the ERP provider, like Oracle for JD Edwards, which is very good, and application support from the system integrator, which varies greatly depending on the specific installation. 

Overall, I would rate this support as seven out of ten.

Neutral

If the customer is not new to implementing ERP systems and has previously used systems like SAP or Oracle, the primary challenge is redesigning processes supported by the new system. Users who are accustomed to certain processes may face difficulties adjusting to new ones.

The initial setup process was relatively straightforward, earning a rating of seven out of ten. 

However, some challenges depend on whether the customer is new to complex ERPs or has prior experience. Resistance often arises from unprepared users when top-level decisions aren't shared.

The implementation involves both the ERP provider and a system integrator, each responsible for different support levels. System integrators manage application-level support, addressing specific installation, setup, and customization needs.

JD Edwards World has high pricing, however, significant discounts are often applied, sometimes ranging from twenty to forty percent. This suggests that the listed price is too high compared to market expectations. 

Overall, I would rate the pricing as seven to eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate JD Edwards World as seven out of ten. 

Scoring around seven or eight is generally the highest I would consider giving any technology, acknowledging that there's always room for improvement.

Neutral

Neutral

We use the product for operations as well as for finance. The World application that we use as a finance ledger.

World is old. It's legacy. It's pretty stable. It's a good solution. 

It does scale. 

Technical support is good. 

The pricing is okay. It's not overly expensive.

Its end of life is already announced, so I don't expect lots of improvement coming from the product anywhere anymore. Nobody wants to invest any more in that application.

I've used the solution for more than two decades. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We're a large company. We have 7,000 to 8,000 users using World. It's boiled down to the regional requirement, however, as we are using it on a global level. Therefore, when you go to different regions, you need to do your customizations. That said, it's scalable. It's highly scalable.

We have found World helpful. In World, you won't have to worry too much. It's a stable system, so you just get the patches regularly. We have been satisfied with how it works and how stable and reliable it is. 

Positive

I am aware of SAP, which is a direct competitor. It's more expensive however they do have similar functionalities. 

We haven't done any implementation in the last ten years. That said, we did upgrade it in 2017-16 to the latest version and it was quite okay. It was complex yet not too much. 

I'd rate it three and a half out of five in terms of ease of setup.

I'm not aware of the exact licensing costs. I don't deal with the pricing aspect of the product. World isn't too expensive, since it is a legacy tool. 

The pricing is fine. I'd compare it to SAP or any other modern application of that nature. It's still lower than SAP and provides the same functionality. 

I wouldn't go with World anymore since it's going to be out of support in the next year three years. That's out of the question. Nobody's going to implement it at this point. If you are a big company and willing to spend millions of dollars, SAP could be an option. That said, eventually, Enterprise One will be offering the same functionality as SAP - and at a lower cost.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We use the solution for HR, maintenance, finance and supply chain.

The solution's UI is user friendly and has good performance and good search facility.

The solution could have more automation AI. We manage it in-house with a dedicated team. Any upgrades are easy to handle, provided you haven't made extensive customizations. Otherwise, retrofitting becomes an additional concern.

I have been using JD Edwards World for over 15 years.

The solution’s scalability is good. We are not seeing any issue so far in terms of adding more functionalities, new branches and new functions.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

Customer service do respond, but we have some positive and negative experiences.

Neutral

The product have implementation expenses, annual renewal, which is increasing by eight percent year after year.

There should be an intuitive end-user interface in JD Edwards World where users can autonomously manage their tasks. For instance, if they wish to design their workflows, they shouldn't rely on the technical team. Similarly, if they aim to launch a product, they shouldn't need technical assistance. The responsibility should lie with the sales team to strategize, execute, and launch products to meet business needs.

It integrate perfectly with your existing infrastructure. I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

I use JD Edwards for warehouse management and item tracking, recording the movement and history of artifacts in our ecosystem.

The most valuable feature for me is the traceability customization, which allows me to track the movement and history of artifacts in our ecosystem. Additionally, the ability to quickly respond to business needs, such as deploying new functionality and validating it through the system, is also highly beneficial.

Improvements are needed in transitioning JD Edwards World to a more stable and reliable cloud product, particularly in terms of GDPR and data privacy compliance. Higher availability and stability are essential for the cloud version, addressing concerns regarding reliability and stability.

I would suggest adding an API analyzer feature to JD Edwards World, similar to CentOS, for better understanding and monitoring of integrations. Also, reinstating Oracle meetups and consulting sessions could provide valuable insights from other users and streamline communication.

I have been working with JD Edwards World for almost five years.

The stability of JD Edwards World is mostly good, but we have concerns when usage approaches 75% of planned capacity. Some users experience login issues, although it is unclear if it is due to the application, integrations, or network problems.

JD Edwards World is quite scalable. I would rate the scalability at an eight out of ten.

Compared to SAP, JD Edwards World customization is more challenging, and finding experienced personnel for JD Edwards is harder. SAP offers easier customization and a larger pool of knowledgeable professionals.

The pricing for JD Edwards World is comparable to other tools, neither premium nor budget-friendly. It falls within an average range compared to systems like SAP and Salesforce.

Integrating JD Edwards World was straightforward, especially through the Google Cloud layer. We primarily use API-based integrations and appreciate the ease of integrating with various systems.

I would recommend JD Edwards World to other users based on our positive experience. We have already recommended it to at least two other collaborators.

Overall, I would rate JD Edwards World as a nine out of ten.

Menu creation is easier now. Before, there was a drop-down menu, and it was restructured.

Other features I like about JD Edwards World are the integration, the control, the security for the users, and the application. And the solution is easy and user-friendly.

I would like report creation to be easier.

I've used the solution for 19 years.

JD Edwards World is very stable.

JD Edwards World is scalable, and there are more than 100 users in my organization working with it.

When it comes to technical support, you can meet with someone, or you also can make a contract.

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes one or two weeks to set up. I can set it up by myself, but that depends on the number of setups and the company's modules. If there are many modules, I might need a consultant for departments like supply chain and finance. The number of people required depends on the time plan. If it needs to be done in two weeks, one consultant is enough, and two consultants for one week.

The number of technical staff you need to deploy the solution depends on the requirements. We can also contact a third party.

You have to pay for a license, and the license cost is calculated based on the number of users you have.

I rate JD Edwards World a ten out of ten. If they are new and implementing the solution, they must prepare the document and process and have key users, process owners, and a dedicated team available for system implementation.

We primarily use the solution for manufacturing, with bills and routings. We use configured products almost exclusively. A bill configurator is a must. The product we sell is highly configurable.   

We need the ability to generate a bill by doing a callout as we know it. Our manufacturing facility would shut down without this.   

There are hardly any errors today, however, the errors we do find are in the modified code in JD World. 

Some functionality is not utilized. We need to understand what our current solution offers and what we need to have in a new solution.

The only thing that is not done is that we don't use all of the functionality or our company (before me) coded around it.  

We do not modify core programs, period. We are impacted by not being able to apply patches readily.   

Modifying core programs is wrong. Only print programs like PO and invoices should be modified. Programs should be bolted on the outside and not impact the core function. They should not hijack fields in the database without understanding the impact. If a date field is defined in the database, it is not just a number.   

The familiarity is great. The ease of use is consistently there. 

We need to explore the functionality rather than seek new software. The old adage of understanding what you have is better than migrating to the unknown applies here.

The company will lose functionality when this occurs and companies need to understand that there will be a loss of productivity for a while. This is due to the staff learning a new way of doing things if you switch solutions.   

The training initially was lacking, and the people who implemented the code are gone. The decisions were not well documented.

There is no support from Oracle here. We only have third-party support. Trying to find a solution by yourself or on Oracle's website is too hard. It needs to be supported better. We don't need a new release, we ust need help dealing with what's there.   

The GUI version needs to be better than it is. The perception is that it is not modern, but the code base is only ten years old. People need to understand that even if you migrate to a new package, ROI is not immediate. It is more than five to ten years away.  

I've been using the solution for seven years and the company has been using it for over 20 years.

I do not know if we used something else previously.

They need to show the cost matrix and a functionality chart.

I do not know if anything was evaluated before choosing this option.