Share your experience using HCL Accelerate

My main use case for Targetprocess in our organization, specifically in the technology and information department, is to monitor all devices and ensure proper performance and functionality of our infrastructure.

A quick specific example of how I use Targetprocess to monitor devices or infrastructure is that it is a perfect tool for multiple services that cover a large volume of transactions, helping to monitor all devices, generate reports, and ensure that our infrastructure functions correctly, which aids in performance prediction.

In addition to my main use case, I also use Targetprocess to manage portfolio demand, resource allocation, and cost optimization on a day-to-day basis.

Targetprocess offers several best features, including seamless integration, as it integrates seamlessly with tools such as Jira, and it is highly customizable with a clean out-of-the-box user interface that also includes integrated entities, monitoring all devices, report generation, and performance prediction.

Regarding seamless integration with Jira, it ensures that our infrastructure functions correctly while also monitoring all devices and ensuring the proper performance and functionality of our devices and infrastructure.

Targetprocess has positively impacted my organization by integrating seamlessly with AWS billing data for improved cost transparency.

I believe that Targetprocess can be improved in areas such as integration, user experience, and customer support, which is somewhat slow and should be improved.

I would also add that customer support is not very proactive and available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and the cost is somewhat high, especially for small organizations working on a tight budget, so making it more cost-effective would be beneficial.

I have been using Targetprocess for the past four to five years.

Targetprocess is very stable.

Targetprocess is highly scalable, and I find it to be very scalable.

The customer support for Targetprocess is not very proactive twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, but sometimes they are very active and helpful.

I would rate the customer support a seven out of ten.

Positive

I previously used the Apptio portfolio solution before switching to Targetprocess.

It took approximately four to five weeks to fully implement Targetprocess in my organization.

We have seen a return on investment through faster planning and increased productivity in my organization, resulting in faster time to market.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the cost is not very effective, especially for small organizations working on a tight budget, though the setup is great after going through the learning curve, which is very smooth.

I rate Targetprocess an eight out of ten because the usability is good, and the tool is easy to use with features that most organizations can utilize; however, additional features such as artificial intelligence integration would enhance the tool's overall usability, and providing additional dashboards for specific roles and executives within the tool would benefit Targetprocess with its scale.

My advice to others looking into using Targetprocess is that it is best used when there is a program or initiative that is being kicked off; it is less appropriate when it is in-flight or towards the end of its implementation. I appreciate the ability to integrate with other tools, specifically with IBM tools, which allows organizations that have already invested in IBM tools such as Cloudability to integrate and use the product quickly and easily. It is a very recommendable tool because it has had a significant positive impact on our organization, and the ability of Targetprocess to integrate with other tools has dramatically increased productivity by cutting down the time to market and project planning by half.

Overall, project planning and better awareness for resources, programs, investments, and the portfolio available for a particular initiative that is being managed or deployed by Targetprocess is seamless.

Targetprocess is deployed in my organization using a hybrid cloud approach.

The cloud provider we use for Targetprocess is Amazon Web Services.

I purchased Targetprocess through the AWS Marketplace.

I give Targetprocess an overall rating of eight out of ten.

My main use case for GitLab is utilizing it in three main ways: one is using the Issues and Epics tracking for tasks, the second way is using the Wiki, which is the documentation feature, and then the third way is for code management.

Out of those three, I find myself using the Issues and Epics tracking feature the most often. I really quite like it because I find it clear and clean to use, and it works well when using it with numerous people.

We use the Issues feature to record our tasks and assign those out, as well as recording the description of what the task requires. Then we use the Epics feature to group the issues into categories, which makes it easier to track the tasks at a higher level.

In my opinion, the best features GitLab offers are the Issues and Epics feature, which I find very clean and clear to use, and it is very quick and responsive. I also quite value the Wiki feature because both of those are built into the same platform, making it very easy to bounce between the two and create links between the boards and the Wiki.

The ability to link between the boards and the Wiki helps my workflow and collaboration with my team by ensuring that if we have any tasks that need to be carried out, we have them on the Issues board, and we write runbooks in the Wiki on how to carry out the task. We copy the link of the Wiki and put it into the description of the tickets so that when someone is working on the ticket, they can very quickly go over to the Wiki and know how to carry out their task, which saves us time.

GitLab has positively impacted our organization by making our code very secure because GitLab prides itself on security. Storing code in GitLab is a very secure way to do it, and from an operational efficiency and time-saving perspective, the Issues and Epics board is definitely helpful, offering a few benefits operationally.

The only feature I have used in GitLab that I thought could be improved is their code generation feature. When I previously used it, some of my questions were met with responses saying that it did not know the answer, and some responses were incorrect as well. I understand this is something new for them, so they are still developing it, but I do not feel that it is in a position where I would use it regularly just because it is not very reliable right now.

I have been working in my current field between five to ten years.

GitLab is very stable. I have not seen any instability issues.

GitLab is highly scalable and could very easily scale to thousands of code repos, which is necessary for any organizational size.

The customer support for GitLab is very good, and I have no complaints because they have always been quite helpful. I would rate the customer support a ten out of ten because I have never had any issues with them before, and they are very knowledgeable.

Positive

Personally, I have previously used GitHub and Bitbucket as well. I find that GitLab has the cleanest and clearest UI out of all of them, and it has numerous features, such as the Issues and Epics tracking feature, as well as the Wiki feature, which sets it apart.

I have seen a return on investment. Any company that generates its own code and develops applications needs a code base, so it is more of a necessity rather than choosing something because it results in a measurable benefit. However, in terms of operational efficiency, a ten to twenty percent increase in speed could quite easily be seen from using the Issues and Epics tracking feature.

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing, to my understanding, GitLab offers competitive rates. There are a few big competitors within this space, such as GitHub and Bitbucket, so GitLab prices themselves competitively.

Before choosing GitLab, I did evaluate other options, and the main competitors I considered were GitHub and Bitbucket. They are great as well, and all three are brilliant, but GitLab, in my opinion, has the cleanest UI, which sets it apart.

I would recommend others to use GitLab because it is a great tool and there are not any real major drawbacks, just a minor one related to the AI code generation. I have given this review an overall rating of nine out of ten.