OpenText Service Manager [EOL] vs SCSM comparison

"Incident management is the most valuable because we're using it to manage tickets for an accounting system. With the reports that are available, it allows us to track and identify trends at the type and item level. It also helps us in managing the workload better than what we had in Remedy, which is what we were using before 2013."

"The solution is simple to set up."

"The workflow engine that standardizes and globalizes the process steps. It drives people through the process by standardization and automation."

"Service Manager gives us a single system where everything is centralized in one base."

"Micro Focus Service Manager is fine. It's a good solution for small accounts with minimal reporting. Micro Focus is a good option because you don't have to worry about the budget."

"The initial setup is easy."

"It helps to register things, to see the changing parts, and to correlate incidents."

"Its flexibility and ease of customization are its most valuable features."

"If it is correctly configured, you can access and give service quickly to all the end users."

"The solution's setup process is relatively straightforward due to the familiar deployment steps similar to other Microsoft solutions."

"A very convenient package like an all-in-one tool but it is actually five or six products acting well together."

"For our cloud-based deployment of SCSM, the Autopilot is the best feature."

"If it is correctly configured, you can access and give service quickly to all the end users."

"The solution is quite easy to integrate with other Microsoft products."

"The remote access is one of the features I really enjoy. The pushing of email updates and things like that are very good."

"The solution offers good productivity at a low price point."

"We aren't able to take emails that come in and turn them into tickets, especially when it comes to attachments. When an email has an attachment, like a screenshot, it is a very cumbersome process, and it does not work very well. I shouldn't have been paying technicians to cut and paste attachments from an email into the ticketing system. It should do that automatically. Other solutions are able to do that. This is something that needs to be improved. Test manager and knowledge management areas are probably amongst the worst parts of this solution. We try to use this solution for knowledge management, but it is not user-friendly. Therefore, it has limited ROI as you need to spend time to try and fully capitalize on the knowledge management system."

"Service Manager is at the end of its life. The architecture, performance, and look are all way behind."

"I think the best recommendation to Micro Focus would be to increase awareness and the marketing for this product."

"It, still, has a bit of more of improvement possibilities in the codeless part. But, I can see that they are working on it, so that's quite good as well."

"The user interface is very clunky. It's only now beginning to be a web-based interface, but for now it's still very clunky."

"It needs to be easier to use for the end users because one problem we had was that we are handling different kinds of cases."

"With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility."

"Customization can be difficult at times because scripting is often required."

"They need more integration with open-source products."

"There is no development with this product, and we had to go and buy additional ITSM solutions to sit on top of it. We had to buy products from companies like Cireson and Cased Dimensions in order to get the functionality that we need out of it. So, we're using Service Manager as an engine, rather than as a full-blown product. It is the engine, but we have other products sitting on top of it to make it work properly."

"The price of this solution is high and it needs to be cheaper."

"We would like to see a web-based interface that works on mobile devices."

"Resources for understanding compliance and relative compliance need to be made available."

"It has not helped reduce the burden on IT resources."

"I have found SCSM not adequate enough to carry out some functions."

"Our office is looking for maybe getting out of SCSM and getting a service desk solution outside of Microsoft."

"The license is not cheap."

"I pay for Service Manager on a yearly basis, and the price is reasonable - I would rate it five out of ten."

"I would say that identify your requirements and pay for the support to implement and test those requirements, and then hope that you did a good job because the cost of their service is fairly expensive."

"HP Service Manager has moderate pricing."

"Micro Focus Service Manager is a little cheaper than other options. You have to pay a monthly subscription fee."

"The license for SCSM is cheap."

"It is an expensive solution."

"The price of the solution could be better. My organization has an enterprise annual license with Microsoft which provides us support."

"The pricing is reasonable."

"It comes free with the enterprise agreement that we have, but the expense really is in having to buy another product to sit on top of it to make it work properly. You wind up having to buy additional support and additional product with their own support and maintenance costs on top of that."

"The price should be lower."

"Licensing can be complex and confusing."

"It is a lower price vs. other things on the market."