Slashdot Mirror
Mid-Range Accounting Solutions for Linux?
markdavis asks: "For Linux to really succeed in business, it must first have support by vendors for the core financial applications: General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, and Payroll/HR. I am the IT Director for a long-term-care medical facility (400 employees) and found out a few weeks ago that the vendor that supplies our GL, AP, HR, and Payroll software is dropping support for Linux, in November (after using them for four years). They code in Progress and have decided to convert to a proprietary web GUI (IIS + IE6 + ActiveX) rather than use Progress + Apache + any browser. This means we either abandon Linux, or we are in the market for new accounting software modules (I bet you know which is my preferred choice). Does anyone use Linux server AND client (or web browser under Linux) software for financials in a medium or smaller/medium sized organization? If so, what do you use? Do you like it? What problems did you have in using it? What other advice can you give to someone trying to use Linux in this manner?"
All businesses require the core accounting functions, mentioned above. Most companies also require 'industry specific' software which is customized for their industry. For example, in healthcare, AR (Accounts Receivable) is VERY different from all other industries. It is 2007, so hopefully the Linux choices for at least the core, non-industry specific financial software have improved since our last search, four years ago.
have been working on an RFI/RFP (Request for Information/Proposal) and identifying as many possible vendors as possible. I have searched through hundreds of vendors so far and identified 39 possibilities, but could always use more."
have been working on an RFI/RFP (Request for Information/Proposal) and identifying as many possible vendors as possible. I have searched through hundreds of vendors so far and identified 39 possibilities, but could always use more."
The problem is that accounting runs the risk of picking the cheapest package out there, not necessarily the best accounting package. While one option may be cheaper in the short order, it may run you more money in the long term from unforseen costs due to inferior software support or each revision of the software requiring a hardware upgrade, etc. I'm sure that many of us in IT have run in to situations where we've been forced to make less than desireable choices due to accounting constraints. Not to mention, he's in healthcare where, unless an executive makes it one of their pet projects to "modernize" the computers, IT generally gets the shaft as far as funding is concerned. At least, that was my experience in my 4 years of performing healthcare IT. Some of you may have worked in poorly funded environments, but I'll bet not many of you have replaced dumb terminals with Windows 95 machines... in 2004.
Accounting does deserve some input on the features that they require and the overall usability, and in the end, the CFO will still be the one to sign the purchase order, but when you're talking a client/server package that needs to be compatible with their current environment, it's not a bad idea to have the director of IT involved in the decision.
If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.
I put my vote in for TinyERP.
It's easy to use, there are great demo's online, and it does everything, multi-platform support, interfacing with eCommerce engines, invoicing, orders, crm, etc...
The job of the accounting department (like any end user) is to write the specification. "We need GL, A/P, A/R, payroll, federal and state taxes, etc.", with additional constraints as required. Must support million+ records. Must support multiple concurrent users. All of the fun domain stuff.
And that's it. If they say "we need package XYZ", they're as off-base as a technical person saying that they must us the Simpson-Barr deprecation schedule for domestic exotic livestock.
The tech people must consult with the accounting department, of course, since both groups need to keep training and maintenance costs in mind, but the final word has to be the CIO/IT department since they understand the cost of integrating the application into their existing shop. The cost of the software itself is usually trivial compare to the human costs and there could be a 100% markup on one package over a nearly identical one if one requires staff obtain and manage hardware outside of their usual expertise.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Looks pretty black and white to me.
A) Switch OSs. This makes the users and the company happy and saves the company thousands of dollars compared to...
B) Switch Applications. This makes one whiny IT guy happy and will cost the company thousands of dollars in lost time and effort making the conversion and retraining.
Looks like "dump Linux" is the smart choice here.
As an an accountant (a CPA even) with both an MBA and a MS in CS, I agree. Accountants are rabid. Don't focus on the fact that it runs on Linux. They don't (and shouldn't) care. I don't care if it runs on two caterpillars and a walnut. Tell them about features and security, heavy on the security. Physical access to servers and logical access to the underlying data. No touchy. Show them pictures of the screens, set them in front of it. How do I do a journal entry? Can I get a trial balance? Will it export to Excel and Access? Give them an honest choice on features. Then the IT dept has to agree that its supportable. Team effort here please, its a joint decision.
Using the Freedom of Speech while I still have it.
If you were actually doing your job - your preferred solution would be that which was better for your employer. Instead, what's clear, is you place your own religious beliefs ahead of any other consideration.
You have an existing accounting system that works, and the only thing that would change is that they wish to use Windows instead of Linux as an OS?
And you're suggesting moving the entire accounting system into a new software package just so you can keep it in Linux?
I'm betting you haven't discussed this with your boss, or with anyone who has ever moved accounting systems between packages.
Keep what works and don't complicate people's lives. Instead going on wild goose chases, take a couple of days and learn the basics of administering the new Vista or XP box.
Three Squirrels
You assume that they'd call you back to do the reverse migration. Think that's a reasonable assumption?
--
$tar -xvf
As a (former) accountant, auditor and now implementation consultant, I agree except: accounting almost *never* gets asked about functionality. The 'do-ers' in accounting know the best way a process works. The managers, who usually come from public accounting (Big 4 or regional) almost NEVER have any actual accounting experience - in terms of doing accounting. They were auditors, which requires no actual accounting ability. Hence, conversations like this, "You're net income is overstated, because you mis-stated depreciation expense for last quarter. Fix it.", "OK, how? What is the journal entry?", "I'm an auditor, not a bookkeeper... you figure it out..." I kid you not.
/rant
Clerks can't pass the CPA exam, because they lack a theoretical background ("Discuss FASB141 impact on long-term assets..."). Managers can't pass Practical Accounting 101 - 'How to keep good books' because they never *worked* as an accountant, yet they became decision makers.
In my experience, a senior-level accounting manager (controller level or above) gets sold on a system by a consultancy - they look at price or sex appeal, but NEVER take a few staff accountants and have them test out the system before purchase. What? Get some high-school educated clerk who has done the same job for 15 years test this complicated product? What do they know? They wear reindeer sweaters to the Christmas party fer chrissakes!
Yah, they only know exactly how the job is done, what should happen, and usually what should work better, but since no one cares to ask their opinion, and they are routinely reminded they are not considered 'the best and the brightest' in the office, because they get paid way less than a freshie straight from University, management never finds out what would actually work.
I went into consulting because I decided, after 4 companies, each worse than the last, that if I had to deal with this kind of idiocy, I was damn well gonna be on the 'getting paid' side of it. That, and I get to talk to Ms. Reindeer sweater and help her out during the implementation and setup where her manager could care less. Kinda nice, actually.
Back OT, don't blame accounting for bad IT decisions - they're either marketing victims, too stupid, or not asked for their input. Blame senior management and their love of free golf outings.