Follow 

Contact

Share

The AMS landscape is evolving rapidly. With the ever-changing nature of technology, older comments can sometimes provide a skewed view to the person seeking feedback. Archived reviews are more than 60 months old, and aren't counted towards the average five star ratings or percent recommended.

Tired and Wounded

Customer Service
1
Does your AMS vendor respond to your organization's requests in a timely and thorough way?
Ease of Use
2
Reliability
1
Customization
3
Membership Size: 
1,001-5,000
Industry Type: 
Transportation / Logistics
Organization Type: 
Trade Membership
Primary Job Function: 
Technology
Number of Years Using the AMS: 
1-3 years

Our main issue is a fundamental one - it is a struggle to get our configuration upgraded and keep it maintained. To summarize, our experience has been clouded by regressions, followed by slow response, and having to escalate issues to get attention. We also feel that the UI/UX is lacking, requiring us to "touch"“ many eWeb forms that one would expect to work well out of the box. More specifically:  

  • Service Pack/HF Issues: This is a common complaint, in that accepting a service pack introduces regressions, which are later (often much later) fixed in subsequent service packs. This requires one to spend significant time regression testing a new service pack, with the worry that it will introduce additional regressions, and start the nasty cycle over again. We find ourselves limping along with work arounds to avoid this downward spiral.
  • eWeb UI/UX: We feel that the UI/UX is clunky, and could benefit from serious usability testing. We have also found bugs in baseline forms, and have been forced to customize many to make the flow make sense to our users.
  • Cost: It's expensive, which would not be a complaint if it was a solid platform. But coupled with the amount of staff time consumed by bugs, an onerous upgrade/maintenance process, and the $$ needed for partners to help fix/troubleshoot, it does not seem cost effective.