OpenText Service Manager [EOL] vs SCSM comparison

"We can have all our requests and incidents registered in one system."

"The solution is simple to set up."

"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 design has been revamped in terms of GUI. The current interface is quite easy to read."

"The initial setup is easy."

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

"The solution will streamline productivity and also improve automation. That would bring efficiency as well the ability to handle a big number of enterprise-wide service needs. Productivity and collaborative capabilities are some of the key benefits."

"Technical support is pretty good."

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

"SCSM is easy to learn because all of the material, including training videos, can be found online."

"The call logging is the solution's most valuable feature. It's very easy to use."

"It is one of the most stable solutions in the market."

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

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

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

"I've used SCSM a lot, and its features are valuable."

"Their end-user interface and technical support features could be improved."

"I don't see anything lacking."

"There's a lot of manual work, which is error prone and time consuming, in how the code gets transported from one system to the other."

"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 good integration with the configuration database, that's lacking at the moment, It's not that good."

"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."

"Micro Focus Service Manager is not very great. It would be better if it had more features. When it comes to features, BMC tops the chart. When it comes to usage, people use BMC more."

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

"The configuration could be easier."

"The solution could be more simple. For example, it takes a lot of work to create reports. It runs on Microsoft SQL queries. Creating custom reports on ManageEngine takes less work from the administrator."

"It would be good if Microsoft added custom attributes or tagging like in Jamf."

"Although some engineers at Microsoft are good, the support often lacks expertise, and response times are slow."

"Once we had an issue with a desktop download that would not open."

"Mobile application integration would be an improvement."

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

"It crashes our client's computers. Sometimes they get blue screens. It would be useful if SCSM could check the upgrades or patches before we implemented them to see if they are going to crash a client's system. Or, if it does install, and the client's system crashes, it would be good if the solution could revert back somehow."

"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."

"The license is not cheap."

"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."

"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."

"I would rate the pricing as two out of five."

"The platform is competitively priced."

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

"The pricing is reasonable."

"It is an expensive solution."

"The price should be lower."

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