We performed a comparison between Microsoft Project Server and OpenText Project and portfolio Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Project Portfolio Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to know what we are doing, how much we have spent, how much time we've taken, and it tells us how much money is left for the project. It also tells us whether we are below or above our expenditures, whether we are below or above our budget."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is stable to use, especially since I work with Microsoft for an extended period."
"The ability to track a project's progress using Microsoft Project Server is the most valuable aspect. It depends, especially when managing multiple projects."
"It is well-established, reliable, and compatible."
"Microsoft Project Server is easy to use compared to other similar solutions, such as Primavera. It functions similar to Excel or others Microsoft solutions which makes it simple for most people to be able to use right away."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is easy to understand and navigate."
"The solution is scalable and easy to expand."
"The solution's ease of use is its most valuable aspect."
"Scenario comparison is the feature most valuable to us and the reason why we decided to choose HPE PPM over other portfolio management products."
"I like the automated calculations, especially on the resource side. When project managers enter their resource requirements into their staffing profiles, they are automatically translated into labor forecast calculations. PPM automates a significant portion of the forecast calculations. Timesheets are also built-in. We automatically process time sheets and bill them accordingly."
"The data provided by PPM is trusted and is available almost immediately; without trusted data there is very less scope of any tool to be successful."
"Recent Program Management lifecycle, Program Management aggregation views due to interactive UI (selection of risks, issues, and changes in Program Overview) and “flash look & feel" of this functional chunk, which is different in comparison to other parts of HPE PPM."
"Has a powerful workflow engine that allows creation of workflow complexities and processes."
"I like the ease of customization from an admin perspective. I'm really excited about some of the things that are coming in version 10.0.3 as far as what admins are able to do."
"Micro Focus Project and Portfolio Management (PPM) has a very strong workflow engine."
"Micro Focus PPM is flexible and easy to use. It's simple to customize and configure workflows."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"The deployment aspect of the product is a bit tedious."
"The solution should be made more collaborative."
"We think that calculations are not working correctly, and there is a need to enter data a couple of times in order to give the correct calculations."
"Microsoft is going to integrate the Co-Pilot features into Microsoft Project. The AI feature is an additional feature. It can look at the plan and identify risks early on from any part of your project."
"The product is difficult to use for complex projects."
"Improvements are needed in the technical support process, aiming for a better user experience."
"When we started using this solution from scratch, we got lost. Microsoft should provide some templates for configurations for certain use cases."
"User interface continues to be poor. The product does not have a similar view in the different modules, e.g., staffing vs financial management, it looks like you are working with a different product and it is not easy to use or intuitive."
"We constantly put in requests for some of the things we need. One of those is being able to export just our standard request type to PDF."
"I would also like to see improvement in PPM's reporting and alerts. PPM has reporting capabilities, including HTML reports and portlets. But a majority of clients will build their own reporting platforms, or they will use external reporting platforms like Tableau and QlikView."
"The solution can sometimes be a little inflexible and a bit caustic."
"They can make its UI better. Currently, the UI is a bit clunky."
"The user interface is very, very old and is missing some functions, such as, for example, re-do, follow, and share functions. The UI is not good."
"There are some limitations when it comes to attaching receipts. For example, if we are going to buy some non-labor-related assets such as hardware, we are not able to attach the receipts in the Financial Management module in version 9.41."
"I was not involved in the initial setup. I know that the project involved a lot of consulting that took a long time."
More OpenText Project and portfolio Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Project Server is ranked 6th in Project Portfolio Management with 55 reviews while OpenText Project and portfolio Management is ranked 10th in Project Portfolio Management with 24 reviews. Microsoft Project Server is rated 7.8, while OpenText Project and portfolio Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Provides holistic reporting and allows us to keep track of what's going on with projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Project and portfolio Management writes "It's flexible and customizable, but the support isn't good and it may be too expensive for smaller companies". Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management and Smartsheet, whereas OpenText Project and portfolio Management is most compared with Jira, Planview PPM Pro, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Smartsheet and Broadcom Clarity . See our Microsoft Project Server vs. OpenText Project and portfolio Management report.
See our list of best Project Portfolio Management vendors.
We monitor all Project Portfolio Management 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.