We performed a comparison between Microsoft Project Server and Planview Daptiv based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to know what we are doing, how much we have spent, how much time we've taken, and it tells us how much money is left for the project. It also tells us whether we are below or above our expenditures, whether we are below or above our budget."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is stable to use, especially since I work with Microsoft for an extended period."
"Project schedule management is very good. Basically, it sits on SharePoint. So, every time we create a project, a new project site is created within that SharePoint environment, which is a very good document repository. It allows us to create issues and risks lists and additional functionality to keep track of what's going on with projects."
"It is well-established, reliable, and compatible."
"It is easily adaptable. In addition, it is easily used on mobile applications."
"The most valuable feature of the Microsoft Project Server is the level of detail with which I can break down a task and check the dependencies."
"One notable positive aspect is its effective project-tracking capabilities."
"It can scale well."
"I like the reporting engine, IBM Cognos, especially the analytics. That's a good tool. It's quite strong on the ideation and capacity-planning side, which is a huge plus."
"The timekeeping features are great and very helpful."
"The powerful collaboration is definitely the most valuable and the fact that you can adjust flexibility to almost any methodology, and the easy creation of complete new functionalities without programming code."
"It's difficult to pinpoint just one most valuable feature, as there are many features that can be beneficial. For the specific use case of my client's project management office, they found the project management features of the application to be particularly valuable, such as project boards, reporting, and the ability to customize views. Additionally, task management and project scheduling were also highly utilized. However, capacity planning was not used as much as the others, as there was a lack of support from executives to invest in training and implementing it due to a lack of processes in place. The project planning features, dashboard, and reporting capabilities were considered the most valuable."
"Changepoint gives us a view of the project status and needs very clearly, which are things that we used to miss with MS Project and Excel."
"The reporting aspects can be improved, which is one of the reasons why I'm using Qlik Sense. In the older on-prem versions, reporting was lackluster, to say the least. Project Online has a better handle on that. However, we will still be using Qlik Sense. We're also looking at an add-on app from a company called OnePlan that adds some additional functionality where Microsoft is not as clean in its approach for things such as portfolio management and some of the trends analysis."
"It should be more agile and more flexible when it comes to customization."
"It would be better if the solution had some more training or resources available for a person who is new to Microsoft Project Server."
"Collaboration within the tool is lacking when you compare it to online or cloud-based tools."
"Microsoft Project Server could improve by making the solution more user-friendly."
"There are certain shortcomings in the documentation part where improvements are required."
"Permission management needs improvement."
"The solution should be made more collaborative."
"Expense management, simulation scenarios, and budget control could be great and useful features to include."
"The areas that should be improved in Planview Daptiv are a subject that can be viewed differently depending on who you ask. I feel they should focus on excelling in one specific area rather than providing average capabilities in many areas. For example, their project planning software is satisfactory but not as advanced as Microsoft Projects. The same goes for the capacity planning tool and reporting capabilities, which can be improved upon by using custom Excel spreadsheets or by hiring a business analyst for additional support. In short, the biggest weakness of Daptiv is that it does not excel in any one area and only provides average performance."
"I find the solution has an excessive amount of features. Many aren't even kept current. Some aren't useful at all. There's an overall lack of coherence within the solution. It can make the execution difficult. Many features can easily be eliminated and it would help streamline the solution. They should get rid of 80% of the features and then really focus on the leftover 20% to make it a really great product."
"It would also be nice to see some improvements on the IBM Cognos Analytics. There's still work to be done on the analytics side of things, like your condition formality."
"This solution needs more standard connectors to other solutions."
Microsoft Project Server is ranked 6th in Project Portfolio Management with 55 reviews while Planview Daptiv is ranked 12th in Project Portfolio Management with 12 reviews. Microsoft Project Server is rated 7.8, while Planview Daptiv is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Provides holistic reporting and allows us to keep track of what's going on with projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Planview Daptiv writes "Useful project management capabilities, beneficial dashboards, but project planning could improve". Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management and JIRA Portfolio, whereas Planview Daptiv is most compared with Broadcom Clarity . See our Microsoft Project Server vs. Planview Daptiv report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors and best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management 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.
