We performed a comparison between IFS Cloud Platform and OpenText Service Manager [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, Atlassian, BMC and others in IT Service Management (ITSM)."The financial posting controls are quite handy. The user interface is really friendly, highly flexible, and pretty intuitive for end users."
"What I like about IFS Applications is that it's easier to use and implement than SAP. I also like that the IFS Applications team is more flexible than the SAP team."
"We could quickly understand what was going on and what the customer wanted to do."
"Individual user profiles that can be configured as templates to minimize data entry."
"Having a young talented programmer, during the six years of use, we were able to save around 75 000 EUR preparing simple modifications using customization rather than ordering them in IFS / Partner."
"There tends not to be a massive weakness in the product itself, as weaknesses can quickly be resolved in the next patch or the next release."
"The most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"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."
"We can have all our requests and incidents registered in one system."
"The workflow engine that standardizes and globalizes the process steps. It drives people through the process by standardization and automation."
"The solution is simple to set up."
"It helps to register things, to see the changing parts, and to correlate incidents."
"Service Manager's best features are flexibility and customizability."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It's easy to scale."
"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."
"The integration is a bit complex, and post-implementation support services need to be improved. They have a service center based out of Sri Lanka. The support aspect is good, but the response time is a little slower than we anticipated. In the next release, it would be better if Warehouse Management could be improvised. They have a product line that's a data warehouse management system, but it's still premature and requires a bit of enhancement."
"Technical support could be improved."
"IFS uses Crystal Report mostly, which isn't too user-friendly. Developing reports isn't easy and requires a lot of dev time. Since SAP bought it, Crystal Report has become more complicated to use on IFS. You have a dashboard for reporting that is good, but it's incomplete. Most of our clients use Power BI or some additional tooling for BI."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex...The technical support my company receives from the implementation partners of the solution is not that great."
"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."
"Ability to place approval check-points in the custom workflow, so clients can decide what they want it."
"Customization needs to be improved."
"Customization can be difficult at times because scripting is often required."
"With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility."
"The product's technical support services need improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Service Manager would be improved with access to automation."
"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."
"The solution does not interface well with other products and is difficult to implement."
More OpenText Service Manager [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
IFS Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 29 reviews while OpenText Service Manager [EOL] is ranked 12th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 48 reviews. IFS Cloud Platform is rated 7.8, while OpenText Service Manager [EOL] 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 [EOL] 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 [EOL] is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, OpenText Service Management Automation X (SMAX), BMC Helix ITSM and IBM Maximo.
See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors and best Help Desk Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) 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.
