I recently spent some time with Microsoft and its manufacturing customers, and what I came away with was the following observation: The issue of whether Microsoft can meet the needs of mid-market manufacturers is becoming a little boring.
Now, don't get me wrong. Boring in this case is good. Boring means no controversy, no real "gotcha," and no headline-grabbing revelations about some major hole in the strategy. Boring means that the message plays well in towns like Coatesville, IN, and Norfolk, VA. And boring means that Microsoft's recently rechristened Dynamics product line is beginning to make sense as a strong competitor after a couple of years of massive product confusion and poor results.
It makes for an interesting new chapter in the continuing saga of Microsoft's entry into the enterprise software market, and it adds a welcome new twist to the headline-grabbing SAP vs. Oracle battle royale now underway. I predict that getting Microsoft more firmly in the game is going to make things a little more interesting for all involved -- and push more innovation, choice, and competitive pricing than ever before.
The world of manufacturing that I saw at Microsoft's recent Convergence user conference was dominated by its Axapta product line, now called Dynamics AX. The company has some other manufacturing-centered products, such as Dynamics NAV (aka Navision) and Dynamics GP (the former Great Plains), but it's AX that gets my vote as the strategic platform to watch. And for good reason -- Axapta was a remarkably well-designed, high-end product long before Microsoft got a hold of it. If I had to place a bet on which code line would likely be dominant when a "converged" Dynamics product hits the market sometime toward the end of the decade, I'd put my money on AX.
So would the customers I talked to. In conversations with companies like Blackhawk Products Group, hailing from Norfolk, VA, and Dixie Chopper, of Coatesville, IN, what I heard was a resounding endorsement of Dynamics AX's ability to meet these companies' respective needs. They liked its price, its flexibility, its coverage of the functionality they needed. Of course, this was a hand-picked set of customers, but the no-BS quality of our conversations made it clear that no one was shilling for Microsoft.
I mention these companies not just as further proof of the ho-hum nature of the "new" Dynamics, but as strong leading indicators of where the competition will be found in the coming years. I walked away from these meetings convinced that there was nothing in either user company's success that was unique to a Microsoft product offering. These user stories have a familiar ring to them, and I would suggest that many of Microsoft's competitors could have done as good a job. But it was Microsoft Dynamics that was given permission to try -- and it was the strength of the AX product that made success possible.
Permission is the trick, and when you're Microsoft, a lot of doors are opened for you. The rest of the market take notice: Microsoft has arrived, and its products are playing well in Norfolk and Coatesville. And a few other places as well.
After a few billion dollars and five-plus years, it's about time.