We performed a comparison between Microsoft Project Server and OpenText Project and portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like being able to manage the capacity in terms of the resources. I also like being able to share documents and information between teams. It's the best solution for collaboration."
"The scheduling feature is the most useful."
"The ability to look at the resource loading is most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is easy to understand and navigate."
"It is well-established, reliable, and compatible."
"The solution is stable."
"Technical support is very responsive - particularly on critical tickets."
"In the competitive landscape of project management and portfolio management solutions, Microsoft Project Server stands out significantly."
"The portfolio management and the resource management are the key features."
"There are so many different pieces of functionality, and we use almost every single piece from deployment to demand, project, resource, and time management."
"Recent Program Management lifecycle, Program Management aggregation views due to interactive UI (selection of risks, issues, and changes in Program Overview) and “flash look & feel" of this functional chunk, which is different in comparison to other parts of HPE PPM."
"Scenario comparison is the feature most valuable to us and the reason why we decided to choose HPE PPM over other portfolio management products."
"Micro Focus Project and Portfolio Management (PPM) has a very strong workflow engine."
"Overall, they have a very strong workflow management capability. That's a very strong feature because then you can model any process easily. Whether it is a demand management process, a pipeline management process, or your project delivery methodology, it is much easier because of their workflow management capability."
"I like the ease of customization from an admin perspective. I'm really excited about some of the things that are coming in version 10.0.3 as far as what admins are able to do."
"Has a powerful workflow engine that allows creation of workflow complexities and processes."
"EPM 2010 UI seems a bit dated now that 2016 is available."
"This solution could improve by adding integration with Primavera schedules to allow the reading and management of them."
"We need to be able to compare milestones, calls, and other variables regarding the projects we are working on. I have to contract developers to make reports, which is where things get complicated. They need to develop personal and custom fields for us."
"The cost could be lower."
"The deployment aspect of the product is a bit tedious."
"The product is difficult to use for complex projects."
"When we started using this solution from scratch, we got lost. Microsoft should provide some templates for configurations for certain use cases."
"The solution's desktop version is not compatible with the MacBook."
"I would also like to see improvement in PPM's reporting and alerts. PPM has reporting capabilities, including HTML reports and portlets. But a majority of clients will build their own reporting platforms, or they will use external reporting platforms like Tableau and QlikView."
"The user interface is very, very old and is missing some functions, such as, for example, re-do, follow, and share functions. The UI is not good."
"Reporting; need to be able to provide fancy reporting out of PPM, way it is done in OBIEE etc."
"Currently, HPE PPM does not allow “Project” approval, but only simple “Demand Request” approval (mobility)."
"I was not involved in the initial setup. I know that the project involved a lot of consulting that took a long time."
"There are some limitations when it comes to attaching receipts. For example, if we are going to buy some non-labor-related assets such as hardware, we are not able to attach the receipts in the Financial Management module in version 9.41."
"We constantly put in requests for some of the things we need. One of those is being able to export just our standard request type to PDF."
"Sometimes features in PPM don't work as expected, or our users request a new feature. Typically, our partner vendor can deploy those changes. But there have been a few instances when we had to raise it with Micro Focus because it's beyond the ability of our partner vendor. When we raise the issue with Micro Focus, it sometimes takes time because it needs support from other customers using PPM, not just our bank. It goes through a voting system. Other customers need to vote for the feature. The features that get the most votes will possibly be added."
More OpenText Project and portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Project Server is ranked 5th in Project Portfolio Management with 56 reviews while OpenText Project and portfolio Management is ranked 10th in Project Portfolio Management with 24 reviews. Microsoft Project Server is rated 8.0, while OpenText Project and portfolio Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Provides holistic reporting and allows us to keep track of what's going on with projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Project and portfolio Management writes "Gives management a cohesive place for tracking business strategies and goals, but cosmetic aspects need work". Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management and JIRA Portfolio, whereas OpenText Project and portfolio Management is most compared with Jira, Planview PPM Pro, Smartsheet and Teamwork . See our Microsoft Project Server vs. OpenText Project and portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
