Hi @YISPPATHAK ,

From a UI perspective the user experience will definitely be different with many pro’s and few cons. Can i ask why you are upgrading to Apps10 instead of IFS Cloud version which is the latest version? You are better off upgrading to the latest in my opinion. 

Cheers

Hello Sajith,

Thank you for the response. We want to practice better change management hence decided to not to go to the latest version. 

Is there a middle ground where we can use both?

Apps10 will allow you to setup IEE which is very familiar for the V8 users.  But you can put some processes into Aurena so that you can learn how to use that UI as well.  You can use both in Apps10, but you should plan which processes will go where so you don’t have to do them twice.

Hi Shawn,

Can you explain what you mean by we don’t have to do them twice?

Thanks!

~Pramada

If you set up a process first using IEE, then you later decide to convert it to Aurena, you will have to setup everything a second time.  The permissions, the context, defining the process.  You can’t setup something in IEE and then just use Aurena and have everything work.  They are two different UI’s and each require the own setup.  If you plan from the beginning to use Aurena for certain processes, then you would only set up Aurena the one time and not IEE and Aurena for the same process.  That is what I mean for do the work twice.

Hi @YISPPATHAK 

There are two sides on this.

Based on IFS8 to IFS10 

Users with experience in IEE will definitely go for IEE as the functionality is well known.

New users do not have this “issue” as they may start using Aurena then.

IFS10 and then? 

As there is only one way to go.. for IFS Cloud, there is only Aurena there.

CONS Aurena:
Based on the framework, there are still topics and functionalities which are not present in IFS10 Aurena. This sometimes make things complicated. As this is a hybrid version, how I would name it.

Different handling of permissions. Rework for all permissions necessary. Or let’s say most of the permissions.

PROS Aurena:

This is the Client IFS will be using in the future. New functionalities will be added and it is based on latest technology. Providing a lot of webinterfaces and stuff like that. Browser based clients provide easy to use on all devices. Even older ones with not that much memory.

You will have updates immediately without the need to deploy the client again to the employees

CONS IEE:

Unfortunately, there is only one CONS from my point of view. It is the latest version where you have an IEE. And I have to admit that the step for IFS Cloud in the future might be even harder when the customer is still using IEE for their employees.

PROS IEE:
Functionality is still the same as in IFS8, Context Menus, information cards and other things are quite easy to use and it is working the same as all other software installed on a client.

Use the same permissions and only add or change some settings. Still work for quite some time, but the logic behind is still the same. Going down from navigator to presentation object and database functions.

My personal recommendation is to focus more on Aurena then on the IEE. It might be a burden for employees for a time, but then you will only have a one time event.

When you continue to use IEE and a little of aurena, the shock will be even bigger when there is no fallback option in the future.

Hope this helps.
Kind regards,

Toby

From a UI perspective the user experience will definitely be different with many pro’s and few cons.

This is definitely true if you are a new user that has never seen IFS.

This is definitely NOT true if you are an existing IFS user that is used to the features and benefits of IEE, Aurena is a step backwards in many ways for an experienced user.  But as was stated, in the future, there is no choice.

Thank you all, for the responses. This is really helpful.

A follow-up question….Are there any efficiencies generated by Aurena? For Ex: Faster order entry if it was taking 2 minutes per order now it takes less.  

I understand this could be user-dependant but still is there an overall consensus one way or the other?

Thanks!

~Pramada.

Are there any efficiencies generated by Aurena? For Ex: Faster order entry if it was taking 2 minutes per order now it takes less.  

Anything data entry related - especially entering customer orders is now significantly slower with Aurena.  There is absolutely nothing optimized about the process.  We have been looking at designing our separate page possibly external to IFS, or at the very least a context just for order entry becuase it is that much harder and slower to enter an order.

There are some things around lobbies that speed things up, but that really isn’t the Aurena UI, it is the necessary method of extracting data because attempting to retrieve large amounts of data or broad views of data is so much harder in Aurena (no sub-query searches within a view, no SQL Query Tool).

If you are searching on a single parameter or drilling down to a known answer using the filter, that can be faster, but it assumes you know the answer the question you are looking for in the first place.  Sometimes you don’t and you are looking for the anomalie or the missing information which I find harder to find and/or notice in Aurena.

So at the moment for us, getting data in is much slower.

Extracting data in an efficient manner is much more difficult unless you make prolific use of Lobbies to compensate.