--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Zac Jason Woodward <zac@...> wrote:
>
> 1. Requires a lot more power than Vantage does. There are improvements in some of the reports as epicor has cleaned them up. However some companies have reported that some task take longer. It will take a lot of time to tweak the database performance unless you pay a consultant to come in.
>
> 2. UOM is enforced and not optional and has an impact on everything it feels like. Financials is completely overhauled. As far as I know we did not lose any functionality, just had to change our business processes in places
>
> 3. Do it yourself if you have the resources. Virtual machines are your friends. If I could do it again I would have built a desktop with 2 SSD's in RAID 0 for the conversions. According to what others have said it would have cut the final conversion time in half. Biggest challenge was getting everyone onboard to test and document changes that affected their departments. This is critical that you do quote to cash test. This will allow you to catch 75% of the problems that you will need to fix.
>
> 4. DO NOT install the upgrade to the same server. Something goes wrong when you go live you can power up the Vantage server and push the go live for another week. The transactions will have been minimal in what you have to reproduce. More importantly your company is still able to work.
>
> 5. EPM.... Needs a lot of work. Make sure you talk to a rep about * ALL * the pieces available and/or required to make it work. If you are still evaluating make your CAM give you a trial. If you are a progress user you will need to purchase replication server and have a MSQL 2008 server somewhere that has SSRS and analyses services. EPM is SLOW. It is written on its own web engine using java. Really hope someday they move it to IIS or apache, its ridiculous. Hosting it on the same server as SQL helps performance. The speed of the end users computer also has a big impact on how well it performs as well.
>
> Looking at your user count and DB size epicor themselves is going to encourage you to separate the DB server from the app servers. Personally I say avoid this as much as you can, but I understand building a machine to host the DB and the users at the same time can become cost prohibitive. If you do have to do multiple servers I strongly encourage either fiber or 10 gig Ethernet backbone between the servers. Also any desktops that you have that are older/slower it will become painfully obvious that they are lacking.
>
> "Zac" Jason Woodward
> Network Administrator
> Intermountain Electronics, Inc.
> O: 877-544-2291
> M: 435-820-6515
> F: 435-637-9601
> www.ie-corp.com
>
> Creating customer confidence through extraordinary service and experienced industry experts.
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gerry Mauricio
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 11:44 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Vantage 8 to Epicor 9 - need feedback
>
>
>
> We are currently reviewing our option to upgrade from Vantage 8.03.407a to Epicor 9.05-9.06 (running on Progress 10.1b with 145 Office user licenses, and 51 MES user licenses; current db is 25Gb). We need to get some 'independent feedback' from Epicor clients who have done a 'similar upgrade' from Vantage 8 to Epicor 9. Specifically, we would like to get your feedback/notes/gotchas re:
>
> 1. System performance - did you experience significant performance gains (much faster response time) with your transactions and reports?
> 2. Functionality - did you find any Vantage 8 functionality that no longer worked/existed in Epicor 9?
> 3. Conversion - what were your biggest challenges? If you can do it again, what will you change?
> 4. Risk mitigation - what did you do to mitigate/compensate for any migration risks/issues you encountered?
> 5. EPM (Enterprise Portal Management) - what are the significant EPM issues/challenges?
>
> I appreciate any feedback you can offer. Thanks.
>
> Gerry Mauricio
> IT Director
> Klune Industries
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>