Enterprise System Spectator blog: ERP and enterprise system vendor evaluation, selection, and implementation.

The Enterprise System Spectator

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

Latest word on the street concerning MAPICS. I'm hearing from reliable sources about some interesting developments concerning MAPICS, following its acquisition of competitor Frontstep last year. At the time of the acquisition, I was skeptical of the ability of MAPICS to support such a wide variety of products: MAPICS XA (written for the IBM iSeries, a.k.a. AS/400), Point.Man (UNIX/Oracle), its Syteline ERP system acquired with Frontstep, plus some secondary products that both MAPICS and Frontstep had acquired, such as the Distribution Architects warehouse management product. The Syteline product itself includes the newly release V7 (completely redeveloped for Microsoft .NET) as well as earlier versions (written on Progress database for Microsoft or UNIX). That's a pretty wide variety.

Although I am still concerned about the ability of MAPICS to support so many products and platforms, it appears that the company at least has a plan. As I noted in my April 19 post, a large installed base is a competitive advantage in the currently weak market for new license sales. And MAPICS, now having over 5,000 customers with 10,000 installed sites, lays claim to one of the largest installed base populations of any enterprise system vendor. The issue will be how to leverage that installed base into new business. With that goal in mind, it appears that MAPICS is taking the following actions:

  1. MAPICS plans to develop a set of common complementary products that will be interfaced or integrated across all of its core systems. For example, interfaces from certain products from the Frontstep acquisition may be built to facilitate implementation by MAPICS XA clients. Or, interfaces from certain products within the MAPICS family may be built to facilitate implementation by existing Frontstep clients. If my vote counts, I would suggest a good candidate would be the MAPICS advanced planning and scheduling (APS) product, formerly known as ThruPut, one of the few APS systems that are based on the Theory of Constraints approach to scheduling known as drum-buffer-rope.

  2. MAPICS plans to continue support for older versions of Syteline on the Progress database. This will be a huge relief to the Syteline user base, most of whom are still running older versions and may not appreciate being forced to upgrade to Microsoft .NET. In this market, MAPICS can ill-afford to alienate its customers, and this is a wise move.

  3. MAPICS is hoping to use the strength of its Frontstep User group to build a stronger user community among all its users. It will strongly support gatherings of all its users, which it will need as an audience to sell its common product extensions.

In some ways, MAPICS appears to be adopting a similar strategy to that of SSA GT, which is also creating a large installed base by acquiring weaker competitors. SSA GT is also known to be planning to offer common complementary products to all of them. As I noted last week, such complementary products do not need to be "best of breed." They just need to be "good enough" to keep existing customers from leaving the fold. But SSA is different from MAPICS in that most of its acquisitions have been on a single infrastructure platform: IBM. With MAPICS, the challenge will be in supporting multiple platforms: IBM iSeries, Microsoft .NET, and Oracle/Unix.

The other challenge, which MAPICS doesn't seem to recognize, is the name "MAPICS" itself. MAPICS is clearly a brand that screams "IBM." For those of us old enough to remember, the MAPICS system was originally an IBM product from the 1980s, one of the first real MRP II systems for the mid-range computing platform. In the 1990s, IBM sold MAPICS to Marcam, which later spun it off as its own company, where it remains today. But today MAPICS (the company) is staking a good part of its future on Microsoft, and to me at least, it is constantly going to have to explain to people like me that it is no longer just in IBM's camp. As much as I hate the constant name changes in the enterprise systems marketplace, in this case a name change might really be warranted.

by Frank Scavo, 4/29/2003 11:06:00 AM | permalink | e-mail this!

AddThis Feed Button

 Reader Comments:

Post a Comment
 

Links to this post:


 

Powered by Blogger

(c) 2002-2008, Frank Scavo.

Independent analysis of issues and trends in enterprise applications software and the strengths, weaknesses, advantages, and disadvantages of the vendors that provide them.

Read more: "About the Enterprise System Spectator"

Frank Scavo Send tips, rumors, gossip, and feedback to Frank Scavo at . I'm especially interested in hearing about best practices, lessons learned, horror stories, and case studies of success or failure.

Selecting and implementing a new enterprise system can be a difficult decision. My consulting firm, Strativa, offers assistance that is independent and unbiased. For information on how we can help your organization make and carry out these decisions, write to me.



AddThis Feed Button


Go to latest postings

Join the Spectator mail list!
Email:
Receive new articles (max once per week).
Easy one-click to unsubscribe anytime.

Search the Spectator:

Computer Economics
ERP Support Staffing Ratios
Outsourcing Statistics
IT Spending & Staffing Study
IT Staffing Ratios
IT Salary Report
IT Security Study
Trends in IT Security Threats
The Computer Economics Report (newsletter)

Get these headlines on your site, free!

More links
Strativa: ERP software evaluation and implementation consulting
35MM Design: Web design, Los Angeles
CISO Handbook
Open Source Strategies

Top 50 Analyst Blogs

TechWeb Readers Choice blog finalist



Spectator Archives
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
Latest postings