I've spent years implementing Microsoft ERP systems, watching them transform from clunky on-premises software to sleek cloud platforms. This evolution wasn't always smooth—it came through acquisitions, rewrites, and sometimes painful reinventions.
When Microsoft acquired Great Plains, Navision, and Axapta in the early 2000s, they were competing products with distinct architectures. For years, Microsoft maintained these separate code bases while gradually adding the "Dynamics" brand. Many businesses found themselves wondering which Microsoft ERP was "best" and received different answers depending which partner they asked.
Fast forward to today, and Microsoft has consolidated its vision around Dynamics 365 Business Central for small and mid-sized businesses. This wasn't just a name change—it represented a fundamental shift toward cloud-first architecture and deep integration with Microsoft's broader technology stack.
Let me walk you through what this means for businesses running legacy Dynamics systems or considering Microsoft for their ERP needs.
Origin Story: GP was Microsoft's first major ERP acquisition back in 2001, bringing strong financial management to the Microsoft portfolio.
Current State: Still supported but clearly not Microsoft's future. Extended support continues through 2028, but no major new features are being added.
Typical Users: Small to mid-sized businesses, especially those with accounting-focused needs in North America.
What Made It Special: Rock-solid financial core, familiar interface for accountants, and a mature ecosystem of third-party add-ons.
Origin Story: Acquired by Microsoft in 2002, this Danish-built ERP became known for its flexibility and international capabilities.
Current State: Effectively replaced by Business Central, which maintains the same code base but with a modernized architecture.
Typical Users: Small to mid-sized businesses across industries, particularly strong in Europe and manufacturing/distribution.
What Made It Special: Highly customizable without modifying source code, strong distribution features, and international tax handling.
Origin Story: Another 2002 acquisition, AX targeted larger enterprises with complex manufacturing and distribution needs.
Current State: Evolved into Dynamics 365 Finance & Operations (F&O), Microsoft's enterprise-grade cloud ERP.
Typical Users: Upper mid-market and enterprise organizations with complex operations spanning multiple countries.
What Made It Special: Advanced manufacturing capabilities, multi-site operations, and enterprise-grade scalability.
Origin Story: Launched in 2018 as the cloud-native successor to NAV, designed to eventually replace GP for SMBs.
Current State: Microsoft's strategic focus for SMB to mid-market ERP, receiving major updates twice yearly.
Typical Users: Modern, growth-focused businesses requiring strong financial management, supply chain capabilities, and Microsoft ecosystem integration.
What Makes It Special: True SaaS architecture, native Microsoft 365 integration, and extensibility through AppSource and Power Platform.
Looking beyond marketing materials, here's how these systems compare in ways that affect daily operations:
| System | Reality Check |
|---|---|
| GP | Server-based Windows application with limited remote access options. Requires SQL Server, Windows Server, and usually Citrix/RDP for remote users. |
| NAV | More flexible with web client options in later versions, but still primarily an on-premises application requiring significant infrastructure. |
| AX | Complex infrastructure requirements with web front-end possibilities but heavy server demands. Later versions offered limited cloud hosting options. |
| Business Central | Built for the cloud from day one. Can still deploy on-premises, but clearly optimized for Microsoft's cloud with automatic updates and minimal IT overhead. |
| System | Reality Check |
|---|---|
| GP | Windows-only client with a dated interface. Most users found it functional but not intuitive for newcomers. Limited mobile capabilities. |
| NAV | Improved with each version but retained many legacy interface elements. Later versions offered web access but with limitations. |
| AX | More modern interface with role-based designs, but complicated for casual users. Required significant training for full adoption. |
| Business Central | Clean, modern web interface accessible from any device. Role-tailored home pages show users only what they need. Microsoft 365-like experience reduces learning curve. |
| System | Reality Check |
|---|---|
| GP | Customizations often required Dexterity (proprietary language) and directly modified source code, creating upgrade headaches. |
| NAV | Easier to customize than GP but still relied on direct code modifications until later versions introduced the extension model. |
| AX | Powerful X++ development language but complex customization model that often led to version lock-in. |
| Business Central | Extension-based model preserves customizations during updates. Power Platform provides low-code options for many modifications that previously required developers. |
I've guided dozens of businesses through migrations to Business Central. Here's what they consistently cite as the most valuable improvements:
A manufacturing client spent $120,000 on a GP upgrade every 4-5 years, each time redoing customizations and facing business disruption. With Business Central, updates happen automatically twice yearly with no business interruption, and their customizations remain intact.
A distribution company with GP needed expensive Citrix infrastructure to support remote workers. Even then, performance issues plagued remote users. After moving to Business Central, employees accessed the system from any device with equivalent performance, saving $45,000 annually in infrastructure costs.
A professional services firm using NAV struggled with disconnected processes between their ERP and communication tools. After migrating to Business Central, they:
Their billing cycle shrank from 14 days to 3 days monthly, improving cash flow by $200,000.
With their legacy AX system, a wholesale distributor needed IT to create custom reports, often waiting weeks. After moving to Business Central with Power BI, department managers created their own visualizations, identifying $340,000 in slow-moving inventory and optimizing purchasing patterns within the first quarter.
Having led migrations from all three legacy systems to Business Central, I've collected these honest insights from companies who've made the journey:
The Good:
The Challenges:
Success Story: A 35-person construction firm moved from GP to Business Central, completing their migration in 10 weeks. They kept their chart of accounts structure but reimagined their project tracking processes, reducing job costing errors by 68%.
The Good:
The Challenges:
Success Story: A 120-employee distributor transitioning from NAV 2016 maintained 95% of their custom functionality while eliminating their on-premises server room, saving $62,000 annually in IT costs.
The Good:
The Challenges:
Success Story: A growing manufacturer with 80 employees chose Business Central over F&O, implementing in 14 weeks at one-third the cost of an F&O implementation, while still meeting 100% of their core requirements.
Based on my experience guiding companies through this decision, Business Central typically makes sense when:
Most Business Central migrations follow this pattern, though timelines vary by company size and complexity:
Pro tip: Start with a process optimization mindset rather than trying to replicate your legacy system exactly. The companies that realize the greatest ROI view migration as a chance to modernize processes, not just technology.
What works: A food distributor migrating from GP assigned "data stewards" from each department who were responsible for cleaning their data before migration, reducing errors by 73% compared to their previous system upgrade.
Reality check: You likely don't need 7+ years of transaction history in your new system. Most successful migrations bring master data and open transactions, while keeping historical data available in read-only legacy environments.
What works: A professional services firm created short video tutorials for common processes, reducing support calls by 65% during go-live compared to their previous NAV upgrade.
Pro tip: Consider a phased rollout by functionality. A manufacturing client went live with financials first, followed by inventory and production modules 6 weeks later, reducing business disruption.
After guiding dozens of businesses through this transition, I've observed that success depends more on approach than technical details. The organizations that gain the most from Business Central:
The good news? Unlike the massive ERP projects of years past, Business Central implementations typically complete in 3-5 months, not years. With the right approach and expectations, most businesses see positive ROI within the first year through increased efficiency, better decision-making, and reduced IT overhead.
Whether you're currently running GP, NAV, AX, or considering your first Microsoft ERP, Business Central represents Microsoft's clearest vision for how modern mid-sized businesses should operate. While the transition requires investment and change, companies that make the leap position themselves on a continuously improving platform aligned with Microsoft's long-term technology roadmap.
This guide reflects my experience implementing Microsoft Dynamics solutions since 2007, including dozens of migrations to Business Central across multiple industries. Specific needs vary by organization, so consult with a qualified Microsoft partner for guidance tailored to your situation.
Explore a strategic guide to selecting the best licensing model for Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central based on your business size, needs, and goals. Learn about licensing tiers, key decision factors, and common pitfalls to avoid.
Matias Orlando
2025-04-05
Explore how Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central drives digital transformation for SMBs by integrating with Microsoft 365, Power Platform, Azure, and Teams. Learn about its evolution, capabilities, and future in the cloud ERP landscape.
Kery Nguyen
2025-03-30
Explore the critical trade-offs between cloud-based and on-premises deployments across cost, scalability, performance, compliance, and more. This guide helps technical decision-makers make informed infrastructure choices.
Kery Nguyen
2025-03-23
