ServiceNow Discovery Reviews

My company tries to get information from the client network to populate CMDB more effectively with ServiceNow Discovery. ServiceNow Discovery is a much more reliable software or process that helps our company get more information about our network components.

ServiceNow has a very effective product offering named Discovery, which is a fairly easy-to-use and impactful tool. In our company, we don't find any hurdles when it comes to ServiceNow Discovery. ServiceNow Discovery is easy to implement, and its scalability features are quite easy to use. ServiceNow Discovery can scan networks very quickly and populate the CMDB very well without much programming requirements or effort. The tool is completely a low-code tool. All the other exercises that our company needs to do for an effective scan are quite easy with the solution. It is quite easy to understand ServiceNow Discovery.

On the patent side, my company faced some issues with ServiceNow Discovery. In the subsequent releases of the product, ServiceNow promptly addressed the patent-related issues in the tool.

More utilization of AI in ServiceNow Discovery can really help our company. Though it may be a very high-level area, I feel AI's functionalities can be leveraged effectively for ServiceNow Discovery. Instead of AI, even GenAI should be introduced in ServiceNow Discovery.

I have been using ServiceNow Discovery for six years.

The product provides great scalability features. When our company started with ServiceNow Discovery, I saw that from the client network, we issued a lot of payloads, and such a payload can be easily accommodated in ServiceNow. ServiceNow's ability to easily manage the big payloads we receive from the client network is a super feature or super offering from the solution that helps our company.

Three or four years back when I needed some support from ServiceNow's support team, I found them to be quite knowledgeable and wonderful since they really helped us and addressed our issues promptly. ServiceNow's support team is the best.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The solution is deployed on the cloud. The tool has very little scope if deployed on an on-premises model. Some companies have deployed the tool on an on-premises model, but our company works on the cloud-based version of the product.

The product can be deployed automatically on this cloud, so the whole process takes just a fraction of a second to complete.

Though I am not much involved in the pricing part, I know that it is a bit costly. As per a general discussion I had with the stakeholders, I figured out that it is a costly tool. There is a need to make additional payments apart from the licensing fees for better support services from ServiceNow.

I did not consider any other solutions in the market since my company heavily depends on ServiceNow. Even my company's clients have completely stretched the use of ServiceNow in all their processes, so my organization has to obviously go with ServiceNow Discovery for now.

In terms of the tool's integration within our company's IT environment, we often need to integrate with third parties to get clearer information about the CIs precisely. My company has integrated Microsoft Intune and other cloud networks into ServiceNow Discovery, and it really helped our company get relevant information about our CIs.

The tool definitely helps our company with asset management and compliance since it provides a deeper insight into the asset management part. Asset management covers not only hardware but also software assets. ServiceNow Discovery is really helpful in gaining more insight into software asset management as well as hardware assets. ServiceNow Discovery is quite helpful to address our company's IT asset management overall.

To make IT infrastructure management easier, ServiceNow Discovery offers scheduled management. Presently, you can automate the complete IT infrastructure management process in ServiceNow Discovery without the need for much human intervention, but you need to define your IP ranges so that the tool can scan the whole network and give a result. On top of the aforementioned functionalities, the tool's effective log management provided by ServiceNow really helps our company if we get stuck somewhere.

I recommend the product to others since it is a powerful tool and a solution that can be considered as the starting point of the other processes, especially if you want to implement software and hardware asset management effectively. For event management and service mapping, ServiceNow Discovery should be implemented initially.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

ServiceNow Discovery is useful for discovering the servers, like the servers of Windows and Linux, from the client network.

Every single feature in every single version of ServiceNow Discovery has been valuable. The worthiness of a feature depends on our requirements. Every feature is unique, and every feature is important in the solution.

We can push some generative AI content to make ServiceNow Discovery more effective, but it's just a random thought. There are no particular use cases because of which the aforementioned changes need to be incorporated in ServiceNow Discovery. Debugging is a bit tough in ServiceNow Discovery, so debugging should be made very easy. Debugging should be made easy while developing the debugging pattern in ServiceNow Discovery.

I have been using ServiceNow Discovery for five years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable tool since it is deployed on the cloud, because of which there are no issues with scalability. The scalability of the product may depend on some subscriptions, which may be a challenge since one will have to invest money. If we remove the financial part, the product's deployment is quite easy.

It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The technical support of ServiceNow DevOps can be challenging because we need to train the resources. If the resources don't receive the right training, and if one doesn't know what needs to be done during a particular scenario, then it can lead to a disaster for an enterprise. Proper training is required before using technical support since then only we can make sense of the support we expect to receive. We need to define a proper process for technical support, like whether it will be L1, L2, L3, or L4. The process should be very clear, and the right information should be provided to the right stakeholders. ServiceNow need not work on support because it is a tool. In ServiceNow, it's all about defining the process and training technical support, which is quite easy. The nuts and bolts required for technical support are catalogs, service requests, and incidents. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup phase for ServiceNow Discovery was hard because a lot of communication had to be done with different stakeholders to understand their infrastructures and processes, which can take time. As a technical person, the installation of the product is just a matter of a few hours, but before that, we need to do a lot of exercises that are quite challenging. A lot of documentation needs to be done, and then we need to understand the perception of the stakeholder and what their expectations are, which can get challenging.

I rate the setup phase a seven out of ten.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The deployment process for the product is easy.

One needs to be more proactive and try to understand ServiceNow Discovery's process deeply. ServiceNow offers a similar offering for every client, and they have a similar kind of offer if one wants to install it, but every organization has a different process. There is a need for focus to understand an organization's process and stakeholder requirements, and vision.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Discovery is predominantly used for predictive monitoring and auto self-healing to reduce manual work and automate remediation of IT incidents, problems, and changes. 

Discovery is foundational for knowing your infrastructure and application components and is key to building a foundation for achieving a target state.

The most important feature of ServiceNow Discovery is the Identification and Reconciliation Engine (IRE) rules. It makes sure of unique identification for each component, like an application or a database, and uploads it to the CMDB. This engine prevents duplicates or errors when importing data into the CMDB, which is a critical feature. So, it is a pretty fantastic feature. 

Discovery, while a bit pricey, integrates well with other tools and offers a centralized discovery solution. These aspects could be enhanced in the new release.

Currently, pricing is based on the number of nodes. Like whether you have under 50, under 100, or under 200 nodes. And if you're a gold or platinum partner, the prices vary depending on your relationship with ServiceNow. So, if they can offer very competitive pricing for customers, the use will probably increase. The adoption of Discovery by clients will increase.  

For better adoption, offering competitive pricing for customers would be beneficial.

I have been using this solution for three years now. 

We do a lot of discovery, discovering on-prem and cloud services into the CMDB, not just that, but server storage and other infrastructure and application components as well. We do a lot of work on the discovery side.

The stability is pretty solid because the CMDB is the foundation for IT service management and to work on all the upcoming technologies, including predictive healing and self-healing automation. So, it's pretty solid that way.

Overall, I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

The scalability of the discovery solution is solid. ServiceNow has had Discovery for a long time, so I'd rate it a nine out of ten.

Our clients are mostly enterprises for ServiceNow Discovery

I've raised some questions, and customer service and support were pretty prompt in responding to that.

Positive

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. The mid-server installation and user credentials are key, but it can take time to resolve duplicates and errors.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. 

We are mostly on the functional side, but I have architects and technical engineers for hands-on installation and everything else. Mostly, I'm part of the solutions, working with customers to tailor solutions to their needs.

The deployment process varies based on size and the number of configuration items. But with initial mid-server installation and user ID credentials, you can start in less than two weeks.

This is expensive, but it meets our needs, so some other clients, they would just go for Discovery because they have different expectations. Whether they want to go for IT service management or not, clients really want to know what they are using, because it impacts the billing directly. So they don't want to overcount the servers that they use, so, I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. 

The licensing costs basically vary because if you are in an MSP model, then the prices are different. And if you're going for a separate purchase because what we technically do is we go through a reseller, and then we get the prices. So the prices are based on that. 

Discovery is definitely necessary. When it comes to discarding a few things that are not part of the network or when you're bringing in an application, 

Application is a logical thing because it's not a physical component. So I think you gotta pay more attention when you're bringing in all your application assets into the CMDB because everything has to be together for the other services to work.

So pay attention because the application is outside of Discovery, but how you do it is definitely necessary. So, trying to come up with creative means to bring your application assets and make sure it works into the CMDB would be the first option.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use this solution to populate the CMDB and to track changes in our environment.

It improves process efficiencies. 

When people need to query for information, they don't have to go to seven different people. They can go to a single source.

It does a good job of collecting the data that's necessary for data centers, and IT's operations.

When it comes to the internal data centers and the on-premise data centers, they are pretty good.

When you switch versions, for example, when you go from Paris to Quebec they will introduce many new things and occasionally things break when they do that. You usually find out after the fact when you stumble into it.

I currently have an issue that we just stumbled into, where our bucket wasn't populating correctly from my own Google cloud. They're trying to figure out how to fix that.

They should include support for Google Cloud.

I have been working with ServiceNow Discovery for ten years.

The version we are using is Paris.

It's a reliable product.

Scalability is pretty good, but they are lacking a bit in the Google Cloud realm.

They are really good in others such as Azure, AWS, and IBM. It seemed to have matured those a little better. Maybe the problem is with Google Cloud being a partner and keeping up with them. I am not sure where it's lacking. Is it ServiceNow or just Google Cloud?

Our users vary from technical people to managers to business people. We do it that way to assign costs so things could be lower.

With the first couple of reports, managers were surprised at the cost, but when you do it in increments throughout the year, you don't realize what the total is coming to until you get to the end of the year.

For the most part, ServiceNow has gone through a few growing pains. They have grown rapidly. 

The first line of support is sometimes lacking. Once you get to the second and third-level people, they are good.

I would rate technical support an eight out of ten. After the first line, you can tell the person is pretty new.

We used Maximo Tatem and it was really cumbersome. 

The data was excellent but you had two different vehicles.

You had your Discovery pool, and you had another server that took the data from Discovery. That had to be mapped into the Maximo database. You then had a Discovery server, with an in-between server that did the translation and put it into Maximo.

It was convoluted.

The Discovery engine was wonderful, but getting the data from Discovery back into the Maximo database was difficult.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

The price could be better. It's a bit on the pricey side.

As a product, they are probably right at the top. Their only competition I would say right now would be Dynatrace.

Dynatrace is missing a few things, but so is ServiceNow. You can take your pick, as they are both good.

The data is really good, it's reliable and they keep adding to it. 

They are using AI with a lot of cases to help build the events, which is good.

I would rate ServiceNow a nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution's to discover infrastructures. The ServiceNow instance is in the cloud and the Discovery servers are on-premises. 

We have five licensed configuration management practitioners and 3,000 end users. 

Cloud Discovery is valuable because it finds global, public cloud infrastructures and updates the integration management database, service catalogs, and asset management details. 

The store is a key differentiator because it offers many compatible third-party and OEM plugins for cloud integrations like AWS, Azure, Adobe, and Microsoft. For example, there are service providers for license and asset management, there is a mid-service for Quantum Discovery, and there are plugins from AWS for service or asset management and CMDB integrations. 

The solution too high priced. 

I have been using the solution for seven years. 

The solution is stable but some work is required. 

Only IP-based assets are discoverable. It takes time to get the related OIDs for newer models and patches do not come easily. Sometimes, we have to do research and discovery from the OEM's website to understand and manually create the required OIDs so the solution can identify the actual assets. 

Our main challenges are with network devices for Meraki and proper discovery for storage or backup solutions. 

The solution is very scalable. 

Technical support is always helpful. 

The setup is a bit complex. 

We implemented in-house which can be done if you have administrator or architect-level knowledge. 

Our implementation took ninety days. We went from on-premises Windows and Linux to Windows desktop laptops, to AWS, to Azure. The last step was SaaS integrations for applications like 365, Adobe Cloud, and Creative Cloud. 

The solution is very expensive. Our use is somewhere close to 50GB per user each month. 

We evaluated Manage Engine's ServiceDesk Plus, Jira Service Management, and Remedy. At the end of the day, the solution was the best fit during that time for our organizational strategy. 

Right now, we are looking for an alternate because the solution is very expensive. 

I recommend the solution and rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use it to gather information from cloud environments such as Azure and GCP. The aim is to conduct scans for various assets, including laptops, desktops, servers, and software. This process extends to retrieving details from the client's database within their cloud infrastructure.

We have several integrations established to receive CI data from various sources. We synchronize this data uniformly. Discovery feature plays a crucial role in consolidating this information into a single repository.

One highly valuable aspect is the use of service accounts, which automates the process of identifying underlying nodes and associated assets. With this feature, there's no need to manually input all IPs or details; instead, it seamlessly navigates from node to node, capturing the relevant assets and relationships automatically.

The current limitation in out-of-the-box features, particularly for fields in tables like servers or laptops, necessitates time-consuming customization through pattern matching involving coding. A more beneficial approach would be to have additional features in the default configuration for easily adding different sets of fields. The manual pattern-matching process is not only time-consuming but also presents challenges during system upgrades, demanding revisits to ensure compatibility.

I have been working with it for one year.

Following the installation and configuration, we encountered minimal issues, and the system has been operating smoothly since then. I would rate its stability capabilities eight out of ten.

Its scalability for data retrieval is robust, but licensing is based on the number of CIs discovered, not usage duration. For instance, purchasing a thousand licenses for a year means tracking the count of CIs discovered. In a production setting, where the number of CIs may grow, planning is vital. Consideration of the roadmap and expected growth is crucial, as bulk license purchases may lead to unused licenses, emphasizing the importance of thoughtful planning. I would rate it eight out of ten.

They primarily provided out-of-the-box solutions. However, when specific modifications were required, we found limited information or resources on their website. I would rate it six out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup involved engineering lower environments, acquiring a mid-server, and formulating precise queries to extract necessary data from third-party sources. This included understanding the infrastructure, identifying service accounts, collecting IP information, and checking for firewall configurations. Once these preparatory steps were completed, establishing connectivity became possible, followed by the ongoing configuration of switches and other required elements. After ensuring the data flow in the system environment, a similar process was replicated in the production environment. I would rate it six out of ten.

In the deployment process, encountering challenges arose when determining the appropriate mid-server to use. The standard server couldn't be utilized, leading to the setup of distinct mid-servers for different environments to facilitate the discovery phase. However, the absence of clear rules for configuring user IDs and providing access made this task difficult. The lack of a visual representation or clear documentation compounded the complexity. The system was layered, with folders nested within folders, each requiring specific access. The Proof of Concept and the subsequent deployment phase spanned three months. The deployment was handled in-house by a team of two individuals.

Scaling down other integrations becomes a cost-saving benefit for any company. While our implementation is relatively recent, and there's still much progress ahead, my initial estimate would be a seven out of ten for the effectiveness of ServiceNow Discovery.

The pricing is determined based on the CIs.

The system is quite robust and encompasses a comprehensive set of features. While the initial setup might pose some challenges, once installed and configured correctly, it proves to be a reliable solution for the long term. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I use the tool for IT change management. 

I am impressed with the tool's incident problem change management. 

The product should improve its customer interface, web interface, and front end. I would like to see the integration of keyboard chat with the solution. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

I would rate the product's stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten. The tool's discovery component was quite difficult to scale up. My company has thousands of users for the solution. We have plans to increase the usage. 

The tool's tech support has a slow response. We have encountered scenarios where there was a lack of response even. They didn't really understand the nature of the problem. 

Neutral

I evaluated the value of the BMC solution and found it to be better. 

The tool's setup was complex. It would rate its setup a six out of ten. The product's overall deployment took two and a half months to complete. We required five staff to complete the deployment process. 

We did the solution's deployment in-house. 

I would rate the product's pricing a six out of ten. We had availed some discount from the standard pricing. Even then, the tool's pricing is expensive. You have to pay some vendor service fees for the product's implementation. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. You need to consider the tool's alternatives before choosing the product. 

Our primary use case for the solution is compliance, understanding our assets, and mapping it against our business for services.

The ability to build CI relationships against our portfolio, services or applications is valuable. It has given us an understanding of each layer from a server application, network and the topography of how it's linked to an application or business process.

The price could be lower.

We have been using the solution for approximately four years.

The solution is stable. We've had some hurdles because whenever we changed networks, IPs or hardware, we forgot to ensure it reflected in ServiceNow Discovery. So we've added it as part of our process, but the solution has been stable. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is scalable. Twenty-five people are currently using it in our organization. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

We haven't had many instances where we connected with support but when we have it has been a good experience. They provide a resolution within a good time frame. I rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. We initially had challenges because we had very tight security and firewalls that were a bit off, so we had to set up many rules around it to ensure the solution worked. Deployment took approximately three months.

We implemented through a vendor team, specifically by an integrator FlyForm.They are one of the best integrators we have used.

The solution is a good product, but it is slightly expensive. It is one of the most costly applications in terms of subscription costs. I rate the price a five out of ten.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the price could be lower.