Review for QAD
Updated April 08, 2015
Review for QAD
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Software Version
eB 2.1
Modules Used
- Finance(ar,ap,gl), Distribution ( Inventory, sales orders, purchase), manufacturing
Overall Satisfaction with QAD
We use QAD from Item creation all the way to Balance Sheet / Income Statement. In distribution, we use it for sales order process, purchasing process, incoming quality and inventory management. In manufacturing, we use it for BOM , Routing and MRP. In finance, we use it for costing, AR, AP and GL. QAD is used by every department of our organization.
Pros
- Good in inventory Mgmt, Incoming quality mfgt, physical count.
- Good in Order to Cash process, Purchasing ,
- Good in MRP , Routing, Product Costing.
- Good in AR, AP, GL = Finance.
Cons
- Latest version has all new features which were missing in old versions.
- ROI - very high with QAD.
- Yearly maintenance cost is very low.
- Support is very good from the QAD customer service team, knowledge base web site.
- Very quick to implement the system.
I have used JD Edwards and Syteline.
JD Edwards is very expensive in terms of licensing cost , maintenance. QAD is very cheap.
JD Edwards is very expensive in terms of licensing cost , maintenance. QAD is very cheap.
Using QAD
2 - Currently, we have 2 resources inhouse ( one - Techno-functional and another - Functional - Supply Chain). Techno-Functional resource is well versed with Functional knowledge as well as Programming skillset, Unix/Linux scripts etc. With 2 resource we are able to run the show ( manufacturing facility with 130 users). On need basis, we use external consultants ( DBA etc).
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation