We performed a comparison between Alemba vFire and Clarity SM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, Atlassian, BMC and others in IT Service Management (ITSM)."When we met with the Alemba vFire from Australia, it was a good discussion and they have a good feature roadmap."
"The workflow is very good, as well as customizable."
"Incident Management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Right now, we are starting to be dependent on the CMDB a lot."
"The tool itself is valuable as a result of all its features combined. Therefore, I have found that there is no feature more valuable than another."
"It helps when you have an incident or performing a problem change management process."
"Our users access it via the web. We have external and internal sources, and we're now introducing the mobile app portion so our computer engineers can respond to tickets remotely."
"The most valuable features are the requests and incident tracking."
"It's fairly easy to use, from a UI standpoint."
"The use, from administrative stance, is pretty simple; and even from an analyst and employee's stances. It's an easy to use system, as far as ticketing systems go, because some of them can be really inundating and complex."
"The flexibility and being able to connect to multiple products are valuable. It allows to use it the way we want to use it versus the way it came out of the box."
"The reporting needs to be improved."
"The product should improve its ability to integrate with third-party tools."
"We had issues with the user interface, the way it was structured wasn't that user-friendly. The chat features could improve. For example, in change management, all the chat discussions can be done via ServiceNow. We are using two separate solutions, such as Teams, to chat, and the Alemba vFire tool to process."
"The product needs to have a better user experience in the interface and mobile functionality."
"It doesn't yet have the ability to integrate with other products."
"We would like the CMDB to be populated automatically. At the moment, everything is manually created."
"The interface for the users is a bit old-fashioned and not user-friendly."
"The user interface is just boring. I'd like to see a more interactive UI, from the end-user perspective, and from the analyst's perspective. I would like a product that looks like it was developed maybe in 2015, or at least 2012."
"Although I wasn't involved in the initial setup I have been involved with upgrades. They have been fairly complex. We've had some issues with upgrades where we had to roll back and get some things fixed. Some things that we ended up tracking back to not following directions right, but then other things we've run into issues."
"Compared to some of the other products, I think we are bit behind."
"We just upgraded about a year and half ago and it was painful. We had the testing of the dev environment, and then testing of the production environment, so it was two weekends out of my life. And stuff broke."
Alemba vFire is ranked 27th in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 3 reviews while Clarity SM is ranked 22nd in IT Service Management (ITSM) with 107 reviews. Alemba vFire is rated 7.4, while Clarity SM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Alemba vFire writes "Fulfills all IT management needs, simple setup, but could be more user-friendly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Clarity SM writes "Quite good back-end architecture for end users but the API is very, very bad". Alemba vFire is most compared with ServiceNow and JIRA Service Management, whereas Clarity SM is most compared with ServiceNow, JIRA Service Management, BeyondTrust Remote Support, OpenText Service Management Automation X (SMAX) and IBM Maximo.
See our list of best IT Service Management (ITSM) vendors.
We monitor all IT Service Management (ITSM) 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.
