I am biased.AX is the baby of the set, it was initiated by Navision/Damgaard when they merged. Implementation for geographically distributed environment on same platform.Huge scalability (hundreds of users). Relativley difficult to adapt for business requirements. Good functionality for project control.NAV is the fast maturing adolescent. New Windows version in the early 1990's - has developed and matured since then.Have seen it used in 1 man/woman/dog business and as local solution in global corporate ERP strategy and most points between all over the world.Obeys 80/20 rule : 80% business fit out of the box across all functions and 20% delivered by partner\agent.Easy to adapt for business requirements.IMHO provides more functionality, more opportunity with less cost and less maintenance thany any other product in the marketplace (including SAP).SL and GP.Who needs them?
jsrark said:AX is the baby of the set, it was initiated by Navision/Damgaard when they merged.
This is actually not true. Axapta was originally released in 1998, whereas the merger didn't happen until the year 2000.
jsrark said:SL and GP.Who needs them?
jsrark said:IMHO provides more functionality, more
opportunity with less cost and less maintenance thany any other product
in the marketplace (including SAP).
This is my two words on the topic:
Navision developed as very structured, integrated and very generic solution that very easy to modify and tailor to specific customer needs.
GP developed as GL system with multiple add-ons. (GP was buying different solutions from different solution centers)
As result: if you can find Vertical solution tailored to your type of business you can pick any system (not only Navision, GP, Solomon, Axapta, MAS90, SAP…). It is always better to find Vertical.
If you can not – go with Navision (i mean between Navision and GP - i do not know other systems).