We performed a comparison between IFS Cloud Platform and OpenText Service Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Help Desk Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"The best feature is the maintenance module, which is essentially an industry-specific workflow designed with a manufacturing module as per industry standards. It's very precise and specific without having complex functionalities. It's straightforward. Field Service Management is definitely a wonderful product that IFS has developed because it caters to field services. The energy and utility sectors can answer their business needs using the software."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"IFS Applications is an all-in-one solution for finance, accounting, and production."
"IFS Applications' best feature is the user-friendly interface that has a .NET Framework application in the front end and an Oracle database and WebLogic middleware."
"The main reason for the ERP project was to bring together our fourteen sites, which had until then worked in separate silos."
"We can have all our requests and incidents registered in one system."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"Service Manager gives us a single system where everything is centralized in one base."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Its flexibility and ease of customization are its most valuable features."
"It's mostly so reliable and has a lot of functionality. We're using a lot of HPE tools and we can do a lot with it. So, its functionality is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"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 CRM was shaky and although this improves in Apps 10, there is room for improvement."
"IFS Applications can improve the reporting capabilities and increase the speed of feedback time in the IFS Applications. This would help with the overall performance of the solution and provide better experiences for customers."
"Sometimes from the sales perspective, clients don't always fully understand how large a task or a project they're getting involved in when they decide, "We're going to switch across to IFS." They could probably do a little bit more, maybe around preparing people for these projects."
"Some kind of bot assistance, some kind of artificial intelligence to help people solve the problems, would be interesting."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The user interface can be improved. When you're clicking through the screens, there are some icons or symbols that really need updating and would be more useful and noticeable if they are aesthetically pleasing."
"It would be ideal if, in the future, the product could incorporate IoT and blockchain elements. We'd like to explore more of these types of features going forward."
"We would like to see AI-driven CSI functions built into the tool that would allow us to quickly tie our improvement goals to metrics and activities, so Assyst will suggest the next steps to help us get closer to our goals."
"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."
"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."
"I don't see anything lacking."
"Customization can be difficult at times because scripting is often required."
"Service Manager is at the end of its life. The architecture, performance, and look are all way behind."
"There should be some front desk provided or some options to let our users serve themselves, because we have about 5000 servers and 400 applications."
"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."
IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 8th in Help Desk Software with 29 reviews while OpenText Service Manager is ranked 17th in Help Desk Software with 48 reviews. IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8, while OpenText Service Manager is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of IFS Cloud Platform writes "Robust, customizable, and modern". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Service Manager writes "A solution that works out of the box. The solution's real strength is its ability to change for your organization's infrastructure". IFS Cloud Platform is most compared with SAP ERP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle E-Business Suite, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and IBM Maximo, whereas OpenText Service Manager is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, OpenText Service Management Automation X (SMAX) and BMC Helix ITSM. See our IFS Cloud Platform vs. OpenText Service Manager report.
See our list of best Help Desk Software vendors and best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors.
We monitor all Help Desk Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
