We performed a comparison between OpenText Operations Orchestration and vCenter Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"The most valuable feature is workflow automation."
"The solution's ability to template and easily implement are the most valuable features. It offers good replication as well."
"The most valuable feature is that it's simple and very ergonomic to use the product compared to other virtualizing product. Out of Microsoft, Red Hat, and IBM, we found VMware to be the best one."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"In regards to the workflows, the fact that we can actually have a full dashboard library of all the existing workflows on this is great. We can see all the workflows and what all the actions do and can work with scripts."
"The hardware abstraction layer, being able to make the VMs portable when moving to a different platform or over a WAN."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is affinity rules."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"I would like to see a greater ability to do mobile administration."
"Many times, customers' licenses are not used because the client is not aware of the features and the product benefits. When somebody is buying a product, they just do a default configuration."
"It is practically difficult at this stage to really comment on the improvisations of V central. But more tech events and PoC cases would help the EA to design better solutions and utilization."
"Storage has room for improvement. It's a big problem for our solution. The interface also needs improvement, it should be simplified."
"It is too expensive. One of the main issues is the price."
"This solution needs to have more built-in workflows."
"The cost of the solution is high."
"There can be compatibility issues."
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 19th in Process Automation with 24 reviews while vCenter Orchestrator is ranked 9th in Process Automation with 44 reviews. OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8, while vCenter Orchestrator is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". On the other hand, the top reviewer of vCenter Orchestrator writes "Enables us to do administration on a centralized layer when using multiple VMware ESX servers". OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Control-M, Camunda, Microsoft System Center Orchestrator and BigFix, whereas vCenter Orchestrator is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, VMware Aria Operations, vCloud Director, Cisco UCS Director and ServiceNow Orchestration. See our OpenText Operations Orchestration vs. vCenter Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.
