| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Event Monitoring | May 27, 2025 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | May 27, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Operations Bridge vs ServiceNow IT Operations Management | May 27, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Operations Bridge vs BMC TrueSight Operations Management | May 27, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Operations Bridge vs IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus | May 27, 2025 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zabbix | 4.2 | N/A | 95% | 106 interviewsAdd to research |
| Splunk Enterprise Security | 4.2 | N/A | 93% | 309 interviewsAdd to research |
OpenText Operations Bridge was previously known as Micro Focus Operations Bridge, Operations Bridge Manager, Micro Focus Operations Analytics.
GE Money Bank, Bank AlJazira, Tech Mahindra
This is a mature product. There is good support from HPE and it involves constant updates. There is a path to move on to the next product.
It's our monitor of managers. It's our monitoring tool and it looks after all our servers.
At the moment, I don't know what the roadmap is for this solution. There's a product that's been out for two or three years now, called Operations Bridge. There is a migration path to that, but it's not an obvious one. HPE has not made that obvious to us, so I'm trying to find out how we move on.
The product and the UI need updating. Everything about the user experience needs updating. I work at the other end, which is the more technical end, and I like what it does. But when a user sees a GUI that looks like it was written in the 1970s, it doesn't fill them with any confidence. It needs more dashboards, more graphs, and more everything that management wants to see.
We've had this solution for 12-13 years.
It's fairly complex deployment, even though it's supposed to work out-of-the-box. It's a product that can be tailored. It probably will work straightaway, but if you want to get the best out of it, you've got to change it to suit your environments.
It's a mature product and has good stability.
The product has good scalability. We've gone from 100 to 700 servers without any hiccups. It's a very scalable product.
I have used technical support. They are good; perfect. We don't raise many cases, but when we do raise cases, it's good. They are the same as any other company. It's just support at the end of the day.
There is an issue at the moment with HPE, in that their support for this product has moved over to Sofia, Bulgaria. That can pose its own problems, but it's like anything that's off-shored. It's going to take a little bit longer, and you have to accept a few more difficulties when you're trying to explain problems or reject solutions.
I've looked at Moogsoft and Nagios as alternative products. There are lots and lots of other ones out there. I’m not sure if we will stay with HPE.
We've got a very mature product that would be awful to try and replace. However, if we don't get what we want out of it, and we can't go forward with it, then the new kid on the block will just come in and slot straight in.
When selecting a vendor, I look for attention to the customer and the support you're going to get when you're going through this. If we do move, it will be a fairly fraught experience. We want to be confident that either HPE or another vendor will be behind us and helping us down that path.
I've been working with it for 15 years, and I know how powerful it is. If you spoke to some of our end-users, they probably wouldn't even mark it, because they don't even use it. They don't use the interface, because they don't like it. There are so many other things on the market now.
Operations Bridge Manager is far to expensive and takes multiple servers to set up, minimally three (3) two gateways and a DPS server. Backend CMDB is inefficient in that when you have other datasources duplicates occur which takes someone who knows how to extract the duplicates without destroying the entire system. Then reconciliation between datasources reinstanciates the problem all over again. Many of the people who I've worked with over the years have dumped the product, like CPS Energy, Ferguson, Wells Fargo and dozens of others. While the tools are exceptionally granular with fabulous rich features and agents have literally hundreds of OOTB policies written, even wading through the milieu of that takes expertise that is years in the making, example, policies used to be just policies or templates, now divided and subdivided into multiple layers called management policies, management packs, aspects, policy templates, hard to follow. Agents while multi threaded are complicated, digests are deployed from them up to the manager showing the level of hardware and software on a system which is ingested into the cbdb if you have an additional ucmdb issues almost unresolvable occur in reconciliation. Many times important CI's get tossed out of the database and discarded permanently with difficulty getting them back in. A colleague of mine said he was awoken sometimes several times nightly due to problems with the tool. I've seen it where you had to restart the Manager multiple times weekly and important events were missed while false positives abounded. Integrations are complex and costly to implement. In other words it takes more time, money and genius to make it work then most companies are willing to spend. No wonder HP dumped the product to Microfocus for 8 billion, who could or would trust a company that does that!