I use it for incident recording based on your inventory.
The easiest route - we'll conduct a 15 minute phone interview and write up the review for you.
Use our online form to submit your review. It's quick and you can post anonymously.
I use it for incident recording based on your inventory.
It helps us detect incidents quickly so we can improve our SLA performance and solve issues faster. This makes our customers happy.
We also use it for asset management. We get some information and data, but now we don't use the full asset management features. We mainly use it to record information about assets like computers and applications.
The best part is the ability to keep records, especially incident records. It's easy to use the tool to store data and monitor it.
We mainly use it for incident logging. We'd like to add service request functionality, but we don't have the knowledge to configure the requests and the workflows properly.
We'd like to integrate our workflows with the incident management, so we use it to manage our work better.
We'd like to implement the service request feature. Right now, we just record everything as incidents. Some activities can take a long time, maybe one or two weeks. This makes it hard to maintain a good SLA, even if we work hard.
So, response speed and workflow improvements.
I have been using it for five years.
The stability is okay. There have been many incidents in the servers where the stability was low.
I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.
It is a scalable product. I would rate the scalability a five out of ten. It is in the middle.
The customer service and support are good.
Positive
The setting up process is not quite easy. It's quite difficult.
Sometimes, we need to contact support and discuss things with our tenant administrator. There’s some back and forth to get things added correctly.
I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive.
We spend a lot. It is expensive.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. It is a good product.
If we consider major players like Ford or BMW, their core focus is manufacturing products like cars. To ensure smooth operations, any arising issues, be it security concerns or issues within departments like HR or finance, require a swift resolution. This is where the product comes into play. It provides a platform for raising tickets and obtaining quick solutions.
For instance, if you require a virtual machine from a specific data center group, you no longer need to endure traditional processes. Automation kicks in, and you have all the necessary details within moments. This efficiency level isn't confined to just IT; it also permeates management levels. Beyond that, the tool offers scalability and flexibility, facilitating the maintenance of knowledge repositories and standard release processes. Additionally, it has features where users can make service requests based on their specific needs, thanks to tailored questionnaires. This ensures that only the exact resources that can support us will be allocated.
The tool needs greater customization flexibility, particularly concerning notifications and the progressive view web page. This is significant because it encompasses various aspects like incident management, problem management, change management, work orders, and tasks. Aligning the GUI interface with these functionalities requires more flexibility.
It also needs improvement in product categorization and information organization based on feedback and surveys. Currently, there are limitations in terms of user-friendliness and customization options. For instance, the inability to adjust certain categories or banners hampers usability, especially compared to other platforms like AngularJS or NodeJS.
The tool needs improvement in monitoring. Every asset has a plethora of monitoring tools available in the market. Requirements may vary from customer to customer, but from what I've observed in large-scale industries, it falls short.
From my experience, it typically takes around six to seven months for BMC Helix ITSM to go through the discovery phase, provide releases, test them repeatedly, and so on. Over the past four or five years, I've raised various cases with different companies, and it consistently took a minimum of three to six months to resolve them. Sometimes, I had to close the cases because I had to move to a newer version to overcome those bugs. Apart from that, it's been quite challenging when it comes to performance because we haven't received that level of support. So, there's a need for improvement or better resources to be allocated at the initial stage. I wouldn't say that we don't receive support, but if the right resources are aligned at the right time, it would make things easier for the end customer.
I have been using the product for more than seven years.
When evaluating the tool's overall stability, I would rate it around a six out of ten upon fresh installation. However, as the system adapts to its environment and smoothens out, the stability significantly improves, reaching around a nine out of ten. So, shortly after installation, it may start at six out of ten, but within six months to a year, it typically stabilizes and earns a rating of nine out of ten for its stability.
The expanding nature of the environment may be unfamiliar. The requirements BMC Helix ITSM suggests for installation are also uncertain, as they haven't been tested in the live environment. Real repercussions become apparent once you proceed with infrastructure installation, including real-time unexpected issues.
My company has more than 1000 product users.
The ease of installation largely depends on your specific requirements when it comes to the initial installation of BMC Helix ITSM. If you're opting for a containerized deployment, it's not necessarily straightforward; I'd rate it around a six out of ten on a scale of difficulty. However, if you're leveraging cloud-based deployment, the tool manages everything, including instances and scalability.
I have experienced all the phases of BMC Helix ITSM: standalone, on-premises, containerized, and cloud-based. I have worked in all these environments. ITSM deployment depends on various factors. Currently, we are transitioning to containers instead of the cloud. Specific dependencies influence this choice. Many large companies opt for containerization, while some move to the cloud. The primary reason is the reluctance to expose their data publicly.
I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.
