Clarity SM vs OpenText Service Manager [EOL] comparison

"The fact that it aligns very well with ITIL. I think that's probably one of my favorite things about it, because it's following up a general best practice for service management."

"We centralized our knowledge from various sources into one source of truth that is continually updated."

"Scalability is very good. We have scaled to more users and more functionality."

"The use, from administrative stance, is pretty simple; and even from an analyst and employee's stances. It's an easy to use system, as far as ticketing systems go, because some of them can be really inundating and complex."

"Ability to write macros, which can in turn trigger some condition or could be conditioned to basically trigger notifications, the workflow desk, or web calls. It is huge benefit to customize it."

"The integration between the ticketing and knowledge is huge, because that is a best practice. The knowledge is great. It is simple but efficient, and it works.​"

"It's fairly easy to use, from a UI standpoint."

"Right now, we are starting to be dependent on the CMDB a lot."

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

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

"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."

"It gives us better understanding and control of service management."

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

"Service Manager does what it should, but it's quite outdated."

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

"The interface for the users is a bit old-fashioned and not user-friendly."

"The API is very, very bad so we developed our own."

"The monitoring tool is in need of improvement."

"When I am reviewing an incident, sometimes there is too much information on the same screen and it is difficult to discern what is of value."

"There are some issues regarding the knowledge base and the configuration manager."

"​Compared to some of the other products, I think we are bit behind​.​"

"I would like to see the API cleaned up."

"We talk a lot about the idea that Service Desk Manager should be more "service" oriented, not just ticket oriented."

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

"I think one area which is the most painful from my point of view is if you need to integrate a lot of the tools, and being able to make that a lot more seamless."

"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."

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

"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 interface could be better."

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

"The solution is quite reasonable compared to other solutions in the market."

"There is a subscripted needed to use Clarity SM. The price of the solution could be less expensive. ServiceNow is less expensive and BMC Helix is priced similar to Clarity SM."

"It is a bit expensive, but you definitely get what you pay for. It is worth it!"

"Clarity offers a perpetual license. Customers purchase the license once and then pay for maintenance. CA provides a subscription model as well. Both models are available for our customers."

"The pricing is based on a subscription model."

"I think pricing of this model is suitable for growing corporations."

"Pricing is simple, as it’s per concurrent analysts."

"I don't see anyone other than large companies being able to afford this system."

"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."

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

"The license is not cheap."

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