Like all software products, the Microsoft Dynamics ERP and CRM solutions have long had partner developed add-ons available and these have been listed in the add-on catalogue. For NAV, some of these became absorbed into the core product; for GP the product heavily relied on the add-ons to bulk up what is essentially bare ledgers. Microsoft has worked hard to improve and police the quality of the add-ons. The new add-on catalogue now only lists solutions that have achieved the “Certified for Dynamics” accreditation. This week I’ve been perusing the new add-on catalogue; my nerd side has appeared as I’ve found it fascinating. There are four ERP solutions and one CRM in the Dynamics suite. I wasn’t surprised that SL (formerly Solomon) had the least amount of add-ons (7 listings); it’s pretty common knowledge that SL is being pushed firmly into its North American, project accounting niche and as such needs fewer add-ons. I was slightly surprised that GP ranked so low with only 32 listings. The number of Certified for Dynamics add-ons is not a reflection of the number of add-ons that has ever been developed, only those that are accredited. Key to accreditation is that the add-on works with currently supported versions (latest release and immediate predecessor), that the code is of an acceptable standard and that there are reference sites. It is my belief that the number of add-ons available for each product is a fair reflection of the commitment the market-place perceives Microsoft has for the future of each product. As in, why spend time and money developing an add-on for a product that has an unconvincing future? So who had the most entries of the 371 listings? (Please note; due to the way the catalogue is indexed there are duplications with the same add-on appearing in several categories.) NAV does with 145 add-ons that include tools for maximising web services, document management and reporting as well as extending functionality for vertical industries such as fashion, pharma and automotive. Next is CRM with 115, reflecting its rapid growth, its need for vertical functionality and commitment for the future. AX scores a low 72, perchance reflecting the scarcity of good AX resource to work with the product or another indictment on the issue of reference sites for this product? Poster child NAV has proven that the market wants it (first mid-market solution in the world to achieve over a million users), the partners are committed to working with it, the resources are in place and the sites are happy. When will Microsoft wake up and see that they should be backing the horse that is in this race?