We haven't encountered any truly complicated issues. Because we know how to use the tool for the most part. There was one time we couldn't resolve an issue ourselves and called support.

They helped us a lot during deployment, but on a day-to-day basis, whenever we have any issues, there is a lot of opportunity to improve. I have also given this feedback to OpenText. I would rate them a five out of ten because there is a lot of room for improvement.

My team and I are quite experienced with the tool, which allows us to resolve most issues independently.

We almost don't need technical support. In my team, I have three professionals using LoadRunner, and out of three plus mine, for four people, we can find solutions to even difficult problems. So, I haven't used their support lately.

They are very good when you get the right team and the right person. When I started out, there were one or two products. The first line generally had a good understanding of those one or two products, so you get a lot of things answered straight away, whereas now, sometimes, it takes a while because the first-line guys ask you if you are a Documentum guy, and then they have to get the information to pass on to the right person. Therefore, sometimes it takes a while, but once we find the right person, the support has always been great. They are helpful and supportive.

The tool's support is good. Though they take time, they always fix my issues. 

Their technical support is excellent.

Support is very poor. We've had a very frustrating experience with them. Initially, when you raise issues with them, they always send a link to some sort of document that is useless to us. After two or three follow-ups on our end, we might start getting answers. Once we escalate further, we get to the professionals, and only then will we get to a solution.

We have had issue issues with the support in the past. It's been improving, which is nice. I had some wonderful conversations with people at the event, so I hope to continue seeing that. The more communication we get, the better it is.

The solution has a good customer service and support team. I have dealt with them multiple times in the past, and they do support us wherever required. I rate the technical support team eight or nine out of ten. To be more concrete, I would rate them a nine.

We didn't have many situations that required us to request assistance, but when we faced certain minor issues, they provided excellent support.

We've dealt with lots of bugs, and we scheduled a meeting for support. They take some time to get to a solution. They'll sometimes take months to get a solution in place.

I understand it is not a small thing when you are launching a new protocol and all. However, they should have, before launching, fewer bugs. They need to take care of a lot of things before launching the product.

We get our support through another vendor.

Customer support is good. We get support for whatever issues we have raised.

Getting support sometimes is a struggle, and it takes a long time to get cases resolved. The support could be improved.

The support team needs to be more coordinated.

Support has been okay. Yeah, they've been pretty knowledgeable about everything. Responses are generally on time. I typically get a response within a day or so.

The technical support team for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is very responsive. My company contacted support about an issue that was related to requirements tailored to my organization and the team helped in resolving the issue and making the solution stable.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise has a very responsive technical support team that was upfront in informing my team when it's feasible to set up a meeting, and when the issue needs to be redirected to another person who's knowledgeable about it.

On a scale of one to five, I would rate the Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise technical support team four out of five.

We need some guidance from OpenText but are not able to directly contact them because we purchased the license via SAP. However, I think that the technical support team should be very proactive.

So far, Micro Focus technical support has been smooth.

The solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP. A few years ago, we also wanted support for IoT. That did not exist. That's something we requested and the product team added it to the roadmap.

I have never called their technical support, but their online documentation is pretty good.

Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive.

Whenever we have any support required from OpenText, the process begins with us submitting a ticket and they normally try to solve it by email. But if required, they are okay with having a video conference or an audio conference. They use Cisco technology for conferencing and they are responsive to collaboration.

Unfortunately, technical support is not as good as it used to be. From an end-user perspective, coming from both me and several of my team members, we have found that over the last year and a half, the quality of support has gone down a couple of notches. It has been since the transition from HP to OpenText, where the support is simply no longer at the same level.

The level of support changes based on the plan that you have but our plan has not changed, whereas the responsiveness and coordination have. Generally speaking, interacting with HP was better than it is with OpenText, which is something that should be improved.

Technical support is always available and ready to help.

More people seem to know how to use Performance Center, so we don't need as much help with it, but it is a more complicated product. HPE, or Micro Focus, has been responsive.

The support from Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise has been excellent.

The first-level guys are OK, but when you get to the R&D guys in third-level support, they're excellent. But our company policy requires us to go though our IT department as they're pretty experienced with Performance Center. But this takes a long time.

OpenText's support is good. 

It comes up periodically; typically when we're doing something we haven't done before. We actually have a combination of support through them and one of their value added re-sellers, AVNET. We actually get level one support through them, so it's a partnered supported arrangement.

Typically AVNET can handle anything unless it's truly about requesting a new feature or enhancement. You need to get back to the product management and developers to request such things.

For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy. Support does not have our knowledge. It takes a while to train them in what our issues are and we have to connect to second or third level support.

It is not usually me who calls tech support but I got the impression that the team is quite pleased with it. Usually, it is good. On the other hand, we have had some problems now that are not resolved. For example, one of my applications is not running at all because we are running on version 12.53. There was some problem with the REST (Representational State Transfer) services and the coding part of our REST services. We were using a very old encoding version that we are not using anymore. We stopped using it a long time ago. But it was still supposed to be compatible in 12.53, and that is what we are using. I know the problem was fixed from version 12.56 and up, but we have not been able to complete the upgrade. 

I'm able to run the tests on the application locally, but not in Performance Center. So we are waiting for this upgrade at the moment to resolve these issues.

Sometimes support is good. Sometimes it's not so good. Sometimes you hit an issue and trying to get across the message of what the issue is, and then trying to get an answer back, can be a bit of a challenge sometimes. You hit an issue that everybody else has hit and it has a solution, then you get the response back. But in the majority of cases, the people that are on the case for you tend to do their best to try and answer what you've given them.

Mercury support was very good compared to HP, however they are getting better day by day.

It's excellent.

It's excellent.

The tech support seems to be pretty good. There have been a few problems that they haven't resolved, but they've led me in the right direction to eventually figure it out on my own. It's very difficult for them to understand all the wide range of applications we use. So I'm really impressed with how ultimately knowledgeable they are, given that they don't actually use all these applications that are out there.

We do have a dedicated team. They work with our tech support and with their tech support in terms of the installations and stability of the product and usability. All those issues, they take it up with tech support.

Tech support is pretty excellent. We are getting pretty good responses back from tech support and, as of now, we are happy. We do have a contact too, from the United Airlines side too so I'm pretty happy with that.

It's been a long time since I needed to use tech support. Normally, as a consultant, I am the tech support, so I don't typically have to use tech support. But when I have, I normally am able to get quickly to either R&D-level or a level-two support because it's a real problem with the product, not necessarily just, "I can't figure this out."

I have not been as impressed as with their other products. They do respond, they do have the knowledge to do this but it hasn't been the same as what I've seen with other products. A little more challenging.

We use a third-party partner to do tech support and it's been fantastic with them.

We have, ourselves, gotten to Mircro Focus on a couple of issues that have been actually escalated all the way up to the team back in Israel, I think that's where they're located.

That was fantastic. We actually had them, they came out on site with us, some of the developers for Performance Center, and talked to us about some of the ways that we were using it. Some of the features that they thought customers no longer needed that we were actually telling them were still valuable to us, and they wound up bringing back a few features that were on the chopping block.

We work quite closely with the local team in Malaysia — they do their job.

Premium support is great, but before that, when we just had general support, it was not all that great. We had issues with just trying to get support to call us back on tickets and also with the turnaround time on resolution.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

Above moderate, but HP is trying to enhance its support level.

Above moderate, but HP is trying to enhance its support level.

As I mentioned, I teach Performance Center classes as an independent contractor, so I do not frequently have the need to contact HP support. In my classes, naturally I hear feedback on different support experiences, and I would say they are an unsurprising mixture of favorable and unfavorable opinions. I can only imagine how challenging it must be to troubleshoot such a complex installation when every enterprise surely has a unique set of variables.

Micro Focus' technical support is fast and efficient.

In OpenText, I have worked with various types of clients. Some clients have platinum customer status, and some have gold. For those levels, the support will be there. At platinum, technical support is very helpful at updating their support and the support is good.

I have used tech support. Not recently, not in the last 12 or 18 months, but yes, I've used tech support. They're responsive. I've had good support. They get to the point. There's not a lot of hand-holding, they expect you to know what you're doing. I have no problem with that. As long as I can get the answer, get what I need and get it done, I'm happy with that.

Technical support is really good. I’ve had stuff bounced around the world to have problems solved.

We use a third-party for tech support and they do a great job.

The company I work for provides Performance Center support.  Orasi has won several awards for their HP support.  I use Orasi support when ever I require customer service for an HP product.  I have never had an opportunity to use HP customer service.

The technical support is very bad. It seems that people will ask a lot of unnecessary questions just to bide the time. We are very frustrated with the support team.

7/10 HP support is getting better. Response times from support engineers are pretty good when using the online ticket system. The Knowledge Base still needs work: searches return far too many results, and their support site’s filtering or employment of key words or phrases seems ineffectual.

Not as fast as I would like, but they work with our customers in addition to working with us which is great because we don’t always have to be involved.

4.5/5

4.5/5

The level of support from HP is average.

The response time for technical support is extremely slow. They are generally not well-versed.

The technical support is awful.

An eight out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

When you initially file a support case, it's difficult because they ask you many technical question to assess the problem. This takes a long time. I think there should be a better way for HP to know what the situation is so that you don't have to think about it for half a day.

8/10

9/10

I have mixed feelings about HP technical support. A few technicians know what they are doing, but the majority don’t.

I haven’t needed to use technical support.

It needs improvement.

It's OK.

It's OK.

7.5/10.

7.5/10.

7/10. Since 70% of the market share is HP, it is very common, and tough, to reach them for support. The estimated wait time is always at least 20 minutes.

Support is nice, quick, and responsive.

A nine out of 10.

An eight out of 10.