We performed a comparison between Microsoft Project Server and SAP Portfolio and Project Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about monday.com, Broadcom, ServiceNow and others in Project Portfolio Management."Technical support is good."
"The scheduling and the customization are very powerful."
"This is a scalable solution. It is easy to set up and to add clusters to your environment."
"The solution's ease of use is its most valuable aspect."
"I like the way you can build the schedule by the Don't Start Before or Don't Start After values. You can use it to build your schedule based on how you change your dates. This is how it actually builds the schedule."
"The most valuable feature of the Microsoft Project Server is the level of detail with which I can break down a task and check the dependencies."
"Deliverables List: Most useful to enable meaningful status reporting at an enterprise level."
"One notable positive aspect is its effective project-tracking capabilities."
"SAP is gradually introducing more flexibility and customization options to the system, allowing users to adapt it to their specific needs."
"The integration portion with SAP models is valuable."
"This solution could improve by adding integration with Primavera schedules to allow the reading and management of them."
"It needs to be more collaborative from inside the application. It only does project scheduling for me. It would be good if it could do other things and be more collaborative, such as sharing tasks for users. It is not really incorporated into MS Office, so you can't copy-paste stuff. It is on its own, doing its own thing. It is only used for scheduling, and it doesn't work well with anything else."
"Permission management needs improvement."
"The deployment aspect of the product is a bit tedious."
"EPM 2010 UI seems a bit dated now that 2016 is available."
"When a lot of users logged onto the site, it took a big toll on the service. Therefore, there is a scalability issue."
"It has to be more user-friendly. For instance, there should be some assistance, like when you go to certain sites, people pop up and say, "Can we help you? What are you looking for?" It's not interactive enough."
"It appears that Microsoft's primary goal is to migrate as much functionality as possible from the legacy on-premises Microsoft Project Server to the new cloud-based Power Apps solution."
"The system is old, so there are several issues that arise when we fetch data from integrated systems. Sometimes the data gets stuck, and there are instances where we need to access multiple pieces of information simultaneously."
"It would be valuable if SAP integrated seamlessly with some products like Jira and Bitbucket."
Microsoft Project Server is ranked 6th in Project Portfolio Management with 25 reviews while SAP Portfolio and Project Management is ranked 9th in Project Portfolio Management with 1 review. Microsoft Project Server is rated 7.8, while SAP Portfolio and Project Management is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Complex and less user-friendly interface, frequent technical issues, and slower speed compared to other project management tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Portfolio and Project Management writes "End-to-end project management capabilities and offers seamless vendor and client contract alignment". Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware, Oracle Primavera Portfolio Management and Planview Portfolios, whereas SAP Portfolio and Project Management is most compared with EcoSys, Jira, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Planisware and Genius Project.
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.