ServiceNow Reviews

I use the solution primarily for IT Financial Management and IT Business Management.

In financial management, this platform has the infrastructure allowing us to expand the way we want to. For example, it gives you many business rules and budget models that you can use to optimize your workflow. It does not put you in a box. Additionally, integrating this solution with other platforms is extremely easy to do.

The asset management application could be improved. They have a lot of the infrastructure built, but it does not come with already made compatibility with some of the most popular vendors, such as Cisco and Microsoft. You have to fix it yourself.

If this solution wants to be a big player in the asset management field, they have to have tools to compete with competitors, such as Tanium, that have integration with Cisco and other vendors.

I have been using this solution for approximately 20 years.

I have not had any issue with the stability.

The scalability is excellent. We have approximately 600 people using this solution in our organization.

The technical support was excellent.

Previously I have used CapStone and Remedy.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The price of this solution is expensive.

I have evaluated Tanium.

For those wanting to implement this solution, I would advise using an expert.

When using this solution you have to expect you will need to continuously optimize it to get the most out of it.

I rate ServiceNow an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for incident management, change request management, and service request catalog. These are our three primary use cases.

Within our organization, there are roughly 15,000 to 20,000 employees using this solution. We have two staff members that handle all maintenance-related issues. 

As our mission over the next couple of years is acquisition, we definitely plan to increase our usage of this solution. 

We aligned several different service desks onto one platform. There is a cost savings in not maintaining multiple systems. 

I find the incident management part to be the most valuable. That's how the service desk tracks tickets.

They could be more competitive with their licensing. We went to roll out asset management discovery and at the time they charge per network device only and you didn't get a price break until you were at 5k devices. To me, I would change the licensing to discovery of all devices. We made do with SCCM instead, but the limitation with using that is that we can only discovery over one domain. 

CreatorCon is an event for Servicenow customers to show off what they've done with the tool. Servicenow benefits because they can partner with the customer to make a solution a permanent solution in the tool. 

I have been using ServiceNow for 11 years. 

In the 11 years that we've been using it, it's not gone down more than once; and we started with just one help desk on it — we now have five.

If you get the right person, the technical support is pretty good. 

We used to use E-Service — it was horrible. 

Deployment took four weeks. 

A vendor helped us with the implementation. That made things pretty easy. 

Our licensing is on a yearly basis. We normally end up doing a true-up payment because we tend to acquire more people and use more licenses.

Yes, Remedy (Salesforce), SysAid, Cherwell, TopDesk. Cherwell came in a close second. 

My advice is to use a third-party vendor to help with the installation. Keep in mind, some are good, some aren't. You would have to send your staff away for training for about six months before they could even attempt to implement this solution. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give ServiceNow a rating of nine. There's always room for improvement, but it's the Cadillac of ticketing systems.

Everything that I've done over the last six years with ServiceNow has been for hospital systems. It was used at different levels for different clients. Many times, it was being used by the whole organization, but my involvement has always been for the department projects. There was significant effort into reporting and dashboards and some automation for approvals. I am currently using its latest version.

Visibility and resource management are the two areas that are improved by the ServiceNow Project Management implementation. The Project Management module provides visibility to leadership. We are able to get accurate dashboards and, more importantly, proper resource management. A lot of this isn't necessarily ServiceNow functionality. It is also a matter of implementation and adoption process.

Before ServiceNow, in the environments I've been worked with, there were a bunch of files, such as Microsoft Project plans or Excel spreadsheets, all over the place, and very rarely anybody had a clear understanding of where we were in the project. By the time they had an understanding, the document used to become dated. 

Being able to have the required information for project management is valuable. I've got multiple people accessing it, and I'm tracking tasks with percentages done. It allows me to have detailed notes and provides the ability to attach documents. I have used a lot of project management solutions, and there were gaps in terms of what was available. ServiceNow has got all the features and functionalities.

It is a solid solution. It is also easy to get into and use. It is certainly highly scalable. 

The reporting, which also includes dashboards, needs to be improved. Both dashboards and reporting require subject matter experts. A lot of end-user configuration and functionality comes with ServiceNow and it is not bad, but when I want to do something slightly more sophisticated, I've got to get a ServiceNow subject matter expert to get those dashboards all set up. One of the big reasons why that's so difficult is that ServiceNow is effectively a whole bunch of databases, and almost every module is fundamentally a database, so pulling information from multiple modules is painful. The key thing here is the Time Tracking piece, which is rather important because that's what helps you automate the percentage done inline. Getting a report that shows combined information from Time Tracking and Project Management into a single view is difficult.

There should be the ability to turn on and off portions of Project Management. I'm not asking them to do a finance portion of Project Management through the interface. Currently, there are hundreds of fields that project managers are looking at and trying to decide whether they should fill them out or not. Being able to configure the user interface without a subject matter expert would be really great. 

When you want to get a little more value out of the product and pull data from multiple modules and do something that isn't built-in and is a user-configurable thing, it gets ugly. Currently, as soon as you install the new version, you've got to go back there and make all those tweaks. There should be just a configuration file that goes to the new version. When a new release comes out and I've tweaked it, I shouldn't have to go back and manually tweak everything again. 

When we look at ITSM pieces, there is a knowledge base that works really well. I feel that the Project Management module does not leverage the knowledge base the way it should. I don't think it needs to be a separate knowledge base. There should be links. Currently, if I am configuring a project and looking at a particular tab or field, and I want to know more details about that, there is no simple way other than to go into the knowledge base and do a search. There is no simple way for me to just click and see the approved knowledge base article about that particular tab or field. 

There is no built-in ability to get to these articles, and the customer would have to build it. All the stuff is in the knowledge base, but I am constantly required to go and do a search and find it. After that, I have to try and figure out if this is the approved one. Most knowledge bases are designed so that your end users can submit articles, at least successful ones. You've got to get the subject matter expertise into the knowledge articles, and there is a clear delineation between the ones that are approved versus the ones that work right. I want both types of articles in there, but I want to be able to delineate which ones are the approved ones and tie them in Project Management. This functionality is already there in some other areas, but it is not there in Project Management. Not being able to link that knowledge base in a more fluid way is a big miss because it just makes adoption much harder.

Resource management should be easier. This is an area where I would love to see an improvement. The nature of ServiceNow is that it tends to be a bunch of fields. It is a bit like an Excel spreadsheet. You're in a software interface, but you've got a bunch of rows and columns. Other than dashboards, there are a lot of rows and columns views that often do not help you to easily see and manage resources. More graphical and more click-and-drag ability around resource management would be really good. The data is in there, and you can run dashboards, reports, and stuff like that, and very often, get the information in a somewhat consumable view. However, it tends to have frozen columns. It would be amazing if they can make resource management a little bit more graphical. There are other solutions that I've seen where resource management was a more visual experience.

I have been using this solution for six years.

From a perspective of it working, there are bugs occasionally, but for the most part, it is very solid. There are always pockets of problems, but when it comes to Project Management, I am yet to see a significant bug or issue. Most of the bugs and issues are more related to a lack of functionality as opposed to something that is broken or bad data. All such functionalities get added in the next version. 

From the perspective of doing what it is supposed to do, it is very solid. My experience has been very good, especially with the most recent release.

It is highly scalable. Once you get over the initial pricing shock, you can have multiple people in there, and you can scale quickly and easily. It is one of those things where you get a better price for more people and most subscription licenses. Technically, it can scale up, but it starts getting expensive.

In the current environment, they have licenses for 180 people who are actively using the Project Management module. They have 30,000 end users, and their users have view-only access to Project Management. Once it is stable, and they are completely comfortable with it, which may be a year or longer, they might potentially expand it to the entire environment. They have 30,000 people in the US, and they also have health systems in South America. So, the total number of users could be between 50,000 to 60,000. Going to South America would probably be two to three years out.

I've got a lot of experience with ServiceNow outside of the Project Management module. Focusing just on the Project Management module, my experiences have been very good. ServiceNow, at least for this particular module, has been smart and only tends to let you get on the phone with somebody who really knows the product. There are not that many support calls typically, and they tend to be just the technical staff that are supporting the module. While you can have end-user support, I've not worked with many customers who buy the support for the Project Management module for anybody who is not actively using it as a project manager, and even those project managers usually rely on the core administrator team. They'll tell them what the problem is, and that core team will call support.

When I've been on the calls with support, which I have done on a regular basis over the last couple of years and certainly with this current customer, I've been very pleased with their knowledge. These are highly technical calls, and it is not what I would call typical support. It is definitely the third-tier support that we are calling and getting, and my experience has been extremely good for the Project Management module.

I've definitely used over 20 project management solutions, but they can't be compared with ServiceNow. Some of them were homegrown, and some of them were built into the electronic medical record solution that was there. 

The current customer I'm working for didn't make a switch. They had made that decision and gone to ServiceNow four years ago. They adopted Project Management probably two years ago. It seemed very logical to go ahead and switch over to ServiceNow Project Management because people were already logging into ServiceNow. About a year ago, in fact, right about the time when COVID hit us, they actually finished the implementation. There have been some hits and misses because the staff resigned and things like that. 

Other customers that I've worked for had either Microsoft Project files or Excel spreadsheets. Many times, they also had a web-based project management solution that literally was a task list with a percent complete and literally four fields per task, and those would be stacked in. A lot of these were more team management solutions such as Microsoft Office 365. None of them is a competitor to what you get from ServiceNow.

It is overly complex mainly because it has a lot of content. There are some out-of-the-box configurations, and there is also a lot of content that is not configurable out of the box. Of course, most organizations aren't mature enough to use the additional content and additional tabs. Typically, the implementers are smart enough to deal with that, but I've worked with customers that weren't smart enough to go ahead and say, "Hey, we need a subject matter expert to come in and install this module." Sometimes, they brought somebody in to do just the bare bone install, and then they wanted to configure it themselves. 

You need a subject matter expert. ServiceNow doesn't always do it, and very often, it is third parties who implement it, but they don't do a great job of educating their customer on what they should and shouldn't do as their initial install. They just say here is the tool to some extent. You should ideally go for subject matter experts that are either recommended by ServiceNow or are directly from ServiceNow. Of course, it gets more expensive as you go up that chain.

ServiceNow could do a better job of prepping their coordinators and supporting this process. It is tough because most of the customers first need training on project management in general before you start teaching them how to use the tool. There is no lack of support. It is just not well-organized and prioritized support. There is a knowledge article for everything from ServiceNow, and all the information is there, but it is not organized in a way, especially for a new user, to say that don't worry about this. We'll get to this later. Here are the things you should worry about, and here are the things that you really should do as best practice. That's the key.

I have been advising and working with implementation teams over the last three years. Every single time, after they implemented and started using it, they started to discover things that they wish they'd known beforehand. That's why it would be good to have an organized set of best practices from ServiceNow saying, "Hey, you're implementing. This is new. You don't have a mature organization that has a bunch of requirements. So, here are the minimum out-of-the-box things that you should enable. We're also going to hide all that stuff that you don't need, and we're going to get these fundamentals working." Guided and organized best practices for organizations that are new to project management would be a huge win for ServiceNow.

It is a cloud product, so it requires just configuration from us. Typically, implementation takes two to three months, which includes all the beforehand and after closeout. You have some meetings, make some agreements, install the product, and get it up and running. Installation would take just two to three weeks, and the implementation would take two to three months because you've got to do training and everything else to truly get it in there. Most organizations also end up having to come back and do remediation that takes an additional three to six months. We're not talking about the setup where everybody is working on it. We're talking about a setup where you've got a small team that is typically working on the issues, coming up with solutions, and then implementing them later. There is usually a three-month to six-month clean-up afterward. It's not uncommon for me to see close to a full year from the first conversation to when they feel like they've got stable, usable, and good reporting coming out of the solution.

It was a company recommended by ServiceNow. ServiceNow has got a top-six list, and this was number two on their list. In terms of knowledge and the ability to solve problems, they were very good. Because there are no organized best practices and things like that from ServiceNow to help customers in avoiding mistakes, I've not seen an implementor that does it properly. I am constantly trying to help, but, of course, you also typically have that executive that just wants to get it slammed in. This is because they think that with the tools in place, things will suddenly get better. However, good technology rarely results in good results. You've got to have adoption in order to have good results.

While I'm certainly complaining about some deficiencies, I have been very pleased with this implementor's ability to come in, implement, explain, tweak, and get things right. I have been very pleased with what they do. Deficiencies are more typical of all of the implementers, including ServiceNow.

In terms of maintenance, I have not worked too closely with the PMO staff that does that, but as I understand it, they've got four people. Two are directly involved, and two are more along the lines of training and support. There are really four roles for them. There is one role of subject matter experts who are constantly looking at what functionality is in use and for which functionality they want to start adopting. They look at what can we do with the Project Management tool. They also create a lot of dashboards and reports. The end-user functionality is very powerful, but when you want a dashboard that starts grabbing things from multiple places, it is not easy. They spend a fair amount of time doing that kind of work. They also provide support and spend a fair amount of time troubleshooting the data, which isn't because the product isn't working correctly. It is because the users aren't correctly using it. They also simply look at the data for management. They kind of audit the data to see that what we know and what we're hearing in the status update meetings matches what's in the tool. When it doesn't match, they audit the content and figure out whether there is a problem. All four of them probably spend at least 30% or 40% of their time doing that audit process, sitting in meetings, hearing what's going on, looking at the status reports, matching those up with what's in the tool, and making sure that it matches.

That's a tough call. I would say yes, but I don't think that many of the customers are calculating or tracking that sort of thing. From my perspective, when we say the return on investment, a lot of times we're talking about hard dollars and being able to readily show that my expenses were reduced. The return on investment for most of the project management solutions is improved performance in project management, and therefore, it is a bit of a soft cost saving because of the improved efficiency and ability to deliver projects. That's usually where ROI is seen, and it is tough to make that a metric.

I'm not aware of any additional costs. I'm pretty sure that the current client is paying just the licensing fee per user. I do know that they've got some support agreement with ServiceNow, but I don't think that is broken out or specific to Project Management. It is just inclusive.

I certainly would recommend it on a regular basis as a viable scalable project management solution. It is a solid solution. It has got all the features and functionalities I want. The lack of visualization of data, ease of implementation, and ease of configuration results in difficulty in training people, and it needs to be more visual and a little bit easier to configure and maintain. Currently, as soon as you install the new version, you've got to go back there and make all those tweaks. It is not all or nothing sort of thing. It is just a case of how much of the functionality done in a manual way has to be redone in each update. That could change over time. They're constantly improving how this works, but in my experience, that was very much the case for the last two upgrades that I've done. Occasionally, I've had problems where existing data from a prior version did not migrate. There is some wonkiness, and you got to go in and clean things up a little bit, but it is pretty minor. It is one of those things where when you've got a solution like ServiceNow that every single person in the organization is using, and you do the update the next morning and realize that none of your reports are right because you've tweaked it, and now, you have to go and fix it. In fairness, if you only use it out of the box the way ServiceNow says you should use Project Management, it probably wouldn't be an issue, but I am yet to see a customer use ServiceNow Project Management out of the box with no changes.

Comparing it to all other project management solutions without consideration of cost, I would rate ServiceNow a seven out of ten.

I have two primary uses of ServiceNow:

1. As our ITSM Platform for providing Application Managed Services (AMS) to Enterprise clients who have solutions on Oracle, Workday, Coupa, and ServiceNow.  NOTE: Other groups within my firm also use ServiceNow to provide IT Service Management to clients on Microsoft, SalesForce, and other major vendors.  We have multiple production instances for delivering Service Desk support to various client install bases, including this one for my above mentioned AMS business.

2. As the ITSM platform for our internal, global support framework. This is a separate instance of the one I use for my UK clients and is 'owned' by our US member firm. Said US firm uses this instance to support not only our internal global Management Consulting business but also to provide AMS to US-based external clients.

ServiceNow has enabled us to rapidly deploy Application Managed Services for new clients, with the ability to configure, extend, and tailor our ITSM Platform to meet individual client needs. ServiceNow's multi-instance model helps enable that flexibility. For example, we recently took on a new Workday client by modifying our ServiceNow instance (configurations and workflows) within 5 months, with successful go-live afterward.

ServiceNow has also enabled our Management Consulting business to provide Digital Transformation services for our clients the world over, as we use the platform as an accelerator for doing IT Target Operating Model transformations.

ServiceNow's Customer Service Management (CSM) Pro & DevOps modules in particular - including ServiceNow's strong interface APIs (to Jira in particular in my case) - have allowed us to:

1. Automate some of the more menial tasks while accounting for our need to develop 

2. Deploy a lot of new features and functionality that get continuously and rapidly introduced by the major vendors via their regular upgrades (e.g. Oracle 4 times per year, Coupa 3 times per year, Workday 2 times per year, etc.).

There are no outstanding gaps or deficiencies that I face at the moment for my business or operational needs. That said, I am interested to see the firm's strategic plans for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), and how the particular areas it will expand on from its existing investments (that feature, for example, in its ITSM Pro and CSM Pro modules). Our AMS business will benefit from further automation of the more mundane tasks as we continue to develop the platform's configurations - including the streamlining / automation of our change control workflow for faster deployment (critical when tackling the very frequent upgrade cadences of Oracle, Workday, Coupa, etc.).

4 years

Very stable so far. I have yet to experience an outage of any of the ServiceNow instances my operations/teams use.

Scalability is good on the production side. It could be better performance on some of our lower environments, notably UAT for our global support estate - although I suspect that is partly down to how our Dev team manage their workloads and the access set up they have (too many users floating in/out?). I have not called for an audit however, so my view here is not qualified.

Minimal need for support - from my personal vantage point - and for the few times we have needed support, the turnaround time and quality of support has been good.  No complaints.

We used Jira initially for our internal Help Desk platform, but it fell far short of needs for the underlying service management workflows we employed.

I entered into already established estates, so was not exposed to the efforts in setting up the ServiceNow instance sets.

All has been in-house. We have full capabilities, as we do service implementations of ServiceNow for our clients and have invested in having internal development and support skills/capabilities.

We moved directly to ServiceNow for two reasons:

1. It was already the production ITSM platform for our US member firm who was given the (internal) contract to support our global management consulting business; and

2. We knew from our multi-year use of ServiceNow for (a) delivering IT Target Operating Model digital transformations to clients AND (b) delivering our Application Managed Services to external clients that this solution would easily meet our ITSM requirements.

We run thousands of automations.

The reason that ServiceNow is as good as it is, and opposed to Remedy, Cherwell, and HP OpenView, is that ServiceNow was the first IT service management platform or enterprise.

ServiceNow was the first true enterprise to service management platform. They were the first to understand that a request is a request and service is service.

ServiceNow goes back internationally a long time ago when they were Fuji. ServiceNow releases are alphabetical. My experience started with Fuji, and they are on the Orlando release now. Even back then, they were able to put any process into ServiceNow, even if it wasn't and IT process, and have it managed through the platform.

Security needs some improvement. The governance, security incident management, cloud management, and the security module are getting better.

Service mapping could be less complicated. The configuration, and running it appropriately, but that's a difficult thing to do overall.

It needs to be more cost-effective because it can be pricey. 

I would love to see ServiceNow create a solid mid-market entry point for it. They tried it in the past and it failed. That was ServiceNow Express.

I have been using ServiceNow for over a decade.

ServiceNow is incredibly stable.

This solution is scalable to a point. Once you get as large as the Department of Veterans Affairs you will have some issues, but it scalable.

We have 3000 people here in our company. Anyone who is in IT is using ServiceNow.

I haven't contacted technical support. 

If you are as close to out-of-the-box as you need to be then you won't have any issues at all with ServiceNow.

ServiceNow is the least complex of all of the platforms available.

When I worked at the bank they went from zero to running it within three months. At that time when dealing with Remedy or other legacy systems, that was unheard of to go from nothing to running in three months.

With one of our customers, we had it up and running in one month.

We have seven members to maintain ServiceNow. They are developers, senior developers, and the head of service management.

The mandatory minimum is US$ 20,000 for licensing. They have a three-year cycle. I am not sure if it works out to be $60,000 for three years or if it's $20,000 for the three years. 

It's mainly for licensing. The more that you use it and the more it goes to other areas in your organization, the more licensing you will have to pay.

There may be some who look at this and use it for the HR service delivery or they could use another HR application that looks cheaper, but they will be missing the point of having all of the information on a single platform.

I manage an automation orchestration team. The focus of my team is external, not internal. The company uses ServiceNow. We are one of the largest and older consumers of ServiceNow. The members of my team have ServiceNow practice, infrastructure automation practice, could management platforms, containers practice, and DevOps. 

Our team is focused on helping other organizations adopt and adapt to ServiceNow.

ServiceNow is in the cloud, it's basically remedy in the cloud. ServiceNow doesn't get deployed unless you are a Federal Agency because they have their own data centers. ServiceNow only allows Federal Agencies to have their own instant data Center.

Make sure that you are big enough to afford it. If you have a small IT department, then ServiceNow is not for you. The problem is that you won't be able to afford it. You must be a mature enough and a large enough IT organization to start using it.

It doesn't just do IT things, it does more than that.

Make sure that you configure and not customize.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

There are multiple use cases associated with ServiceNow. The major use case is IT service management, incident management, and IT operations management. ServiceNow offers GRC and solutions that integrate with other security systems for cybersecurity. I have been involved in both ITOM and ITSM.

ServiceNow offers a range of ITSM, IT incident management, and PRCPs. The entire platform makes it an excellent product for users. Its capability to manage end-to-end ITSM is necessary because no other competitor is offering such a comprehensive solution.

The utilization of AI in ServiceNow needs enhancement. Their incident management system requires attention. If you examine it closely, there's an extension available in the market for future consideration. ServiceNow is quite advanced in incident management solutions. If ServiceNow aims to improve its incident management capabilities by incorporating AI/ML and other general components, it would advance the product and enhance its use cases, ultimately boosting productivity. This would lead to improved overall value for enterprise customers.

I have been using ServiceNow for eight to ten years.

ServiceNow is a very stable product. I have heard a couple of integration issues in some places.

ServiceNow can be easily scalable. However, scaling down may pose a problem because, if someone has purchased a certain quantity of subscription-based licenses, they cannot be reduced. You have to complete the term of those licenses whether you're scaling down or up.

We cater the solution to enterprise customers.

Our delivery team used to interact with ServiceNow, and they used to receive support from them. They are responsive. Most of the time, issues are resolved. They ensure a smooth delivery process and quick response. In certain complicated situations, such as new integrations where ServiceNow is not supported, there is a lot of email exchanges.

Positive

ServiceNow offers a very comprehensive tool that covers end-to-end IT services and IT operations management. This is where enterprise customers seek an end-to-end solution. ServiceNow is being adopted by numerous customers. I have experience with BMC Solutions.

BMC also provides an IT service management platform called BMC Remedy. Remedy is less comprehensive and user-friendly compared to ServiceNow. I've encountered support and configuration issues with BMC Remedy.

There is a large pool of trained workforce available for ServiceNow. Considering their market share, which exceeds 60%, there are ample skilled resources in the market. ServiceNow technology has been established. I haven't encountered challenges with ServiceNow projects in terms of implementation or configuration wherever I've worked. However, the deployment can vary depending on the company and partner, and how they've structured their practice teams and training resources.

If it's a Greenfield project, then a new deployment is necessary. For enterprise customers, integration becomes the key focus. ServiceNow offers a substantial integration portfolio to address these needs.

Return on investment is good because once the overall comprehensive solution is deployed, it offers a lot of ROI to the end customers. If a customer opts for a point solution to manage their ITSM and adopts different technologies to integrate, it is going to cost them, and then it will add up to their complexity.

The solution is expensive compared to other tools but holds value for money.

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

I have been exploring the wireless designer service on ServiceNow.

Although verbal explanations may be challenging, I can provide detailed comments and notes in the code. This facilitates collaborative learning in the catalog domain, making understanding various efforts and products simpler.

It's a straightforward and effective approach that minimizes the need for extensive explanations. It streamlines business processes, enhances efficiency, and fosters collaboration through its comprehensive platform, offering notable advantages in IT service management, automation, and customizable applications.

It should enhance its offerings by providing the chance to obtain course certifications at an affordable fee. The functionality of the mobile application is still not entirely clear or optimized. The UI of the mobile application needs improvement.

I have been working with it for two years.

It provides good stability. I would rate it eight out of ten.

The technology is growing rapidly. I would rate its scalability capabilities ten out of ten.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The cost is quite high. I would rate it ten out of ten in terms of pricing.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

We use the solution to manage a suite of applications.

The solution has an efficient code engine. It helps implement the workflows very well.

The solution's stability and pricing need improvement.

We have been using the solution for eight years.

It is a stable solution, and I rate its stability a seven. Although, the troubleshooting functions are complicated to use.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability as an eight out of ten. 

The solution's initial setup process is easy. The time taken depends on the volume of code.

The solution is expensive. I rate its pricing a seven.

It is a good tool; I rate it a nine out of ten. I advise others to ensure that it fits their business use cases.