Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Micro Focus Service Manager.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The reporting is not very strong. it can be improved. Customers need to combine different data from different sources to the same report, but it's quite difficult to do. You have to do it with many different versions. With the new version moving toward the codeless configuration is good, but it's losing flexibility. There should be a larger selection of configuration tools made available to allow some parts of coding to be codeless and others allowing you to make some coding for business rules and workflow. You need some coding ability and functionality. It is difficult to find a customer who doesn't want to make any kind of customizations. It comes with many limits making it very difficult especially with on-premises customers. I like the support but they could improve. In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to reporting and the dashboard. Also, I would like to see the configuration simplified without losing flexibility. The best model that I have seen was with PPM where you can provide some coding with flexibility allowing you to configure to the customer's requirements but having limitations at the same time, but they are meaningful limitations that are easy to negotiate with the customer explaining that it is to prevent it from being a completely customized tool that will be very difficult to maintain, upgrade and update the versions. I would like to see a balance between the two. Flexibility plus simplifying the configuration.
On certain implementations, it can be very difficult to customize and then very difficult to maintain as well. This is because it is quite a complex solution. Users need to be very conscious of how they set up the solution in terms of how they propose and ultimately set up the end terminals to make it easy to use for end-users. The setup on past projects had been quite difficult for two reasons: the first is that it's quite a technical tool so it takes a lot to set it up and customize it. The other issue is that there's a lack of tool experts, which makes it even more difficult to set everything up properly. The solution does not interface well with other products and is difficult to implement. The entire system needs to be redesigned to help improve overall usability and design. When you synchronize or perform a task for event management from external tools, you have issues of performance because synchronization can take four or six hours before there is a solution. It's very hard for the end-user to customize items, but if they were able to, it would be easier for them to arrange specific views and reports that would be more relevant to them.
Their end-user interface and technical support features could be improved.
* Pure cloud-based native functionality is lacking. * It lacks templates to support out-of-the-box best practices.