|
midrange.com
Jeff,
I agree with the difficulty in justifying the ALFs each year, especially
when I am requested to see "where can we cut back on expenses?". It's a
bug chunk of money each year. The on-going financial outlay for ALFs makes
it harder to get new stuff put in - my R/F project has been deferred for
going on 3 years now, and I can't get approval for another programmer. I
seriously think my only saving grace is that senior management realizes how
tightly integrated our entire operation is into using MAPICS - it literally
controls our entire plant except for maintenance, and all our office
departments work with MAPICS to do their jobs (except for Sales and
Marketing - they just feed MAPICS orders). We view it as a cost of doing
business. And since we continually look for ways to improve processes, and
whatever we do almost always involves the ERP system, I can show value.
But that doesn't mean I don't wince when I approve the annual
invoice.......
Incidentally, I think I should jump in to defend Konrad's point of view.
If our company was a "static" user of MAPICS; if I didn't have the
management team that our company has that I get to work with on continual
improvement projects, the ALFs would really be an ouch to my department.
We view MAPICS Browser (and R7) as an important upgrade path - if we were
going to just stick with the older applications the ALFs would really be
tough for me to justify.
As I understand it (and I could easily be wrong), green screen MAPICS is
pretty well going to stay at R6, with some enhancements added as time goes
on - sort of like the old MAPICS II (we got "Multi-Mod" enhancements about
1987 or 1988). I wonder if MAPICS could offer a "tiered" ALF? One level
(at a lower cost) for companies that won't move to Browser, and another
(current cost) for "active" customers that are using Browser. They could
set the pricing by what modules are owned? That might help a lot of
companies out. I wonder how many (if any) companies quit using MAPICS
because their license expires and they won't pay the ALFs?
I pay a percentage of software purchase cost as annual maintenance for a
number of packages we use besides MAPICS. That's pretty well standard (and
Microsoft is trying to get on the same bandwagon - boo!). The MAPICS
invoice just seems so large because of how many modules we have and use,
and they all come due at once.
Konrad, I don't always agree with everything you say, but you DO make me
think, and you have really helped me on a couple problems over the years.
Keep reading and posting!
Dale Gindlesperger
IT Manager/Special Projects Leader
Fleetwood Folding Trailers, Inc.
Somerset, PA
"Jeff Green"
<jgreen@xxxxxxxxxx To: "'MAPICS ERP System
Discussion'" <mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
om> cc:
Sent by: Subject: RE: ALF Expense
Analysis
mapics-l-bounces@m
idrange.com
11/10/2003 08:32
AM
Please respond to
MAPICS ERP System
Discussion
I've been lurking here for awhile, so I guess it's time to throw my 2
cents in. I don't think Konrad is the only frustrated customer out
here. I know I am asked frequently what we receive for the ALF money we
pay each year and I have a hard time justifying it against the 1 or 2
PCM's we load and the 10 or so support calls we make. I agree with Dale
in that there are intangibles that are there, but it is difficult to
illustrate those to management. I think MAPICS could accomplish quit a
bit if they would start 'giving' away a piece of client software to
replace one of your existing applications every time you pay your ALF.
This would spread a lot of goodwill among the existing customer base
(who help fund the development), and help reduce MAPICS support costs
for older legacy applications.
Jeff Green
ERP Manager
Metal Sales Manufacturing
Sellersburg, IN
www.mtlsales.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Snyder [mailto:jeffreygsnyder@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 8:36 PM
To: mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: ALF Expense Analysis
Always good to hear at least one customer out there is happy with
MAPICS
Sometimes i get sooo fustrated from all the bashing on this
thread...maybe the grass just looks greener on the other side ???
Thanks again Dale, for the breath of fresh air. Konrad never ceases
to
amaze me.
Jeff Snyder, CPIM
Mapics Consultant
From: DaleGindlesperger@xxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: MAPICS ERP System Discussion <MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: MAPICS ERP System Discussion <MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: ALF Expense Analysis
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:43:10 -0500
Hi Dale,
Yeah, I think the ALF is pretty steep myself - it's easily the
largest
single item in my budget. But I think I still get decent value for
it,
especially as I plan on upgrading to R7 as soon as they finish CSM.
We've
used Browser since 1999, and we are increasing our usage, and at
least
it's
a lot more stable than it used to be. Of course, that could be
because of
the newer versions of Winwoes being a little better than the old
versions.
I was initally concerned about the mismash of languages, as Konrad
mentioned (I think he missed a couple, like PowerBuilder for those of
us
running MDCC, and probably some others), but they seem to work fine.
I am,
however, very much looking forward to running in a full Java
environment
on
R7.x when we convert.
One thing to keep in mind is that our ALFs don't just fund existing
application enhancements. They also fund e:Info and the folks at the
response line, which is worth a lot to some of us. It's great to get
a
speedy response via e-mail, and generally fast response via phone
when I
or
my people need to talk to a human bean on something weird that is
happening. There is also continuing enhancement to some older
modules,
like the Offline Shipping Enhancement, and such. Also, it costs a lot
to
fund R&D for the new hardware, modules, and languages (WebSphere and
such).
On a tangent - Konrad, I noticed no one said they have loaded 5118
yet. I
have it sitting in my drawer, waiting to see if it's OK. Hasn't
ANYONE put
it on?
Dale Gindlesperger
IT Manager/Special Projects Leader
Fleetwood Folding Trailers, Inc.
Somerset, PA
_______________________________________________
This is the MAPICS ERP System Discussion (MAPICS-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mapics-l
or email: MAPICS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/mapics-l.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From Beethoven to the Rolling Stones, your favorite music is always
playing on MSN Radio Plus. No ads, no talk. Trial month FREE!
_______________________________________________
This is the MAPICS ERP System Discussion (MAPICS-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mapics-l
or email: MAPICS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/mapics-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
