The terminals themselves don't seem to be well designed and have the appearance of being put together with off-the-shelf components. Hiding cables can be challenging. The design is slim and svelte enough, but it has the appearance of being more fragile (although it doesn't appear be particularly so). These terminals are best when left in a single location, at least in our implementation as switching revenue centers requires IT involvement.
VeriFone Point definitely knows the VeriFone payment hardware and support tools. They work with many businesses using this hardware, so their remote management tools are thoroughly capable of handling this hardware. This allows them to meet the needs of a small deployment, maybe 20 terminals or fewer. We quickly found out that we would have been better off setting up our own tools and staff to support our deployment of VeriFone hardware. Based on the number of terminals we have in use, our geographical span, and hours of operation, we need to address issues more quickly and personally than VeriFone Point is able to. While they are responsive, their tier I support is pretty generic and mostly assists with power cycling.
Knowledge and experience: Point supports many businesses with many VeriFone terminals throughout the country. Therefore, they have much experience with the hardware.
Availability: When calling for support, it is rare to not get a response from a human. Some calls are answered after only minutes of hold time, others can take much longer, but a human is almost always available.
Integration with rGuest Seat is terrible, and it's a companion product. This definitely never lived up to its promise.
The boot process for the terminals is long and ridiculously unprofessional looking. There are some sloppy defaults for the boot process and the initial setup is needlessly complicated.
Shift management is confusing for staff, particularly when signing out at the end of a shift. Would like to see more work on this area.
Bureaucracy: Since this is the payment industry and a very large company, they move slower than an iceberg with most projects, including ordering new terminals or adding new features.
Availability of project support: Aside hardware troubleshooting, it often feels very difficult to get help from Point support for things like opening a new location, adding a feature, or making other changes requiring any level of planning.
Inconsistent support staff: One issue may be handled very differently by different support staff. We often work with somebody for hours on one issue only to call back later and have the same issue solved in minutes by a different person.
Support is hit or miss with this platform. If you get a tech that knows the system, the experience is excellent. There have been more instances of escalated tickets going unanswered, which I deem unacceptable. Even if the answer is "I don't know" or "we can't do that" I expect an answer. Contrast this with VMware, who will file a bug report if they can't resolve the immediate issue and then will follow up with you. When it comes to IG support, I don't have confidence that they'll pursue a concern very far and they've been lax with follow-up
InfoGenesis had a great implementation team and worked with us closely on the rollout to ensure minimal disruption. Micros terminals had better design overall and looked like they'd have lasted for 100 years, but Oracle was not fun to work with. IG's reporting options have made our Finance people happy as well. We were concerned with multiple integrations on the platform it replaced, but all of these turned out to be non-issues and we were able to work with IG staff to get what we wanted out of it. I'd prefer the hardware to be thought out more thoroughly, as it's weak in appearance by comparison despite being very usable.
We started using VeriFone Point when we switched from software-based credit card processing to VeriFone payment software. With our previous software system, we had a similar experience with support to what we have experienced with VeriFone Point. Support for payment industry tools tends to be excessively pragmatic, to the point where they ignore symptom clues while having us power cycle hardware for the fifth time.
Our previous platform required more than occasional love and care and was hard to develop solutions for. InfoGenesis terminals don't have a lot of trouble in operation, which leads to more uptime and happy customers.
I previously mentioned rGuest Seat integration. We never got this to work as promised and got different answers from different resources when asked the same question.
Server sprawl began almost immediately. We went from a two server design to five in the end and still have occasional problems with kitchen printers.
