We know, BaaN IV contains process package as well as manufacturing, distribution, finance and etc. Its process function is very good, and the largest Ink & Paint maker worldwide, DIC group implemented this package.

SSA ERP LN does not contain process package. I know the reason. SSA has its own package focusing on process industry, BPCS, or now called SSA ERP LX. For marketing reason, SSA cut off the process package from BaaN is reasonable.

But why BaaN ERP, or we often called BaaN V, doesn't contain process package? BaaN ERP released before 2003, I'm very sure, then, it was not in SSA period. So, why invensys cut off the process package from BaaN? Also for marketing segment reason? Focus on discrete industry and abandon process industy? Or Invensys already knew BaaN would be acquired by SSA later?

Welcome for discussion.

First of all there where technical problems,
The structure of the item table had changed so the application had to be interlay rewritten.
Invensys had there own ERP process product that if I recall was called Proteon ir something that sound like that.
The president of Baan wanted to close protean, but the clients made a user group and convinced him to drop the idea and continue supporting that product.
I think that because of complex change and cost they just dropped it, for other products.
I assume that if 40 or 50 Baan IV Process clients will demand from SSA they will add the logic to SSA ERP LN

The SSA model does not serve its BaaN IV customers well - especially given the Baan VI enhancements. It is not like SSA is providing much more than cash incentives to migrate to the other platforms. To add insult to injury, the platforms require some back office reinvention by putting in a AS/400 into a Solaris shop. Bad pizza.

Rumors I have heard are that the pieces are there, but the direct competion to the other (lessor?) platforms is stopping the release.

Frankly, if the SSA strategy is to migrate to two platforms - essentially BPCS and BaaN - then they need to provide a logical migration path to a shared code base. Otherwise, they will be supporting Baan IV, BaaN VI and others. From a cost standpoint, why would you do it.

If SSA really wanted to pull out of the slow lane, they have a real opportunity to capitalize on the process side with BaaN's flexibility and robustness by pushing quality and process forward and into the chemical/food/beverage market verticals. Other vendors are smaller and don't provide a great place to migrate towards. Process is the one system type which is largely disregarded by the big ERP guys.

Not everything is a widget.

__________________
COBaanGuy COBaanGuy

One point we need to remember is that it was Baan who decided the newer releases (BaanV and LN6.1) would not have the process modiule. All that SSA did is stall the release of LN for a year or so while they redid the documentation and polished some migration code.

Which raises the question of what is their 'real' stategy (not what some sales-speak may claim it to be). The stall in release yielded many millions of dollars (probably as much as the IPO raised) in saved support costs to SSA. Existing BaanIV sites with stable and mature releases cost almost nothing to support whereas sites upgrading software cost heaps to support.

This tells the same (sad ) story over and over again. It is perfectly clear to me that SSA are not in the software business. At the moment the are in the 'milk legacy support contract' business. When that begins to dry up they will move on to some other very cleverly found money making niche. The IPO gave them most of their money back. We should watch their annual reports closely for dividend payments for preference shares and abnormal repayments.

I'de sure like to get some financial advice from Mr G.

When Baan was acquiered by Invensys they decided that Baan was a better product fit for the Discrete industries and selected 4 verticals to support. A&D due to Boeing, Electronics Due to Solectro and Felxtronics, Automotive due to Paccar, International and some other suvivors and Machine Bulding Industry made to order.

At the time Invensys was the owner of Protean. It never made sense to me, since I used to be involved with Baan in Latin America in which more than half of Baan's customers are Process.

In Baan 5 they lost process and Transportation, and they always promissed that in Baan 6 they will put it back on. They put transportation (Freight Management) and due to the Invensys influence they never put back Process.

There are several stories about why Process was taken out. I have several versions, but the only thing I can conclude is that is SAD to see that Baan does not support Process anymore.

Now Protean is SSA Product, and SSA announce convergence SSA ERP LN with Protean. See attached file.

Attached Files

Protean_v5[1].0_Update_and_Roadmap_-_Kari_Miller.pdf (938.0 KB, 108 views)

After reading slide 22 I conclude that the plan is that Protean will not be merged to LN. Instead, it will be merged into the Production Model Product Line and gets integrations with LN and LX.

__________________
Regards,
Evert-Jan

Hello,

We use the process model in Baan IV and containerization heavily. This is one of the reasons why our migration to Baan 5 or LN will be a big issue.

Can we all team-up and raise this with SSA?

Regards,
Suresh