Likelihood to Recommend
If a new feature should be added but unsure of how it will actually work or how users will accept the new enhancement or change, this tool allows you test and measure initial results. This saves so much time and energy knowing the results before it is deployed and might have low user adoption or acceptance.
Read full review
The ease of implementation combined with the managed services result in a tool that virtually anyone can use - implementation is less than 10 lines of code added to the relevant pages of the website (we simply added it to our master page template to have it available on any page) and from there the customer can be as involved or not involved as they wish. At BSI we are very hands on with the testing programme - usually developing and designing the tests ourselves and having HP build them, but if we wanted to HP to develop, design and build and limit our role to QA and review that is an option.
Read full review Pros A/B or Multi Variant Testing as a methodology to gather insight from customer usage. Experimentation as a feature within LaunchDarkly offers information around the success of one variant over another and whether the experiment has reached statistical significance. Being able to decouple deployment of code from the release of a feature is hugely valuable. Development teams are empowered to manage features within their production applications for reliability or testing purposes. Read full review Because it is a managed service the need for intervention by our internal IT group was removed. This allowed us to control the pace of the testing programme without being influenced by IT resource allocation The client and technical account managers are very good at suggesting tests or potential improvements HP regularly holds custom forums which are always informative and provide an opportunity to learn from and network with peers and industry leaders Read full review Cons Limited number of users on cheaper plans that is limiting our ability to audit log who is making changes. Some of our engineers are confused between flags and segments and have set up items incorrectly. Better documented support for React with Typescript. Read full review The dashboard interface is difficult to navigate, but I understand that they are currently developing/testing a new much more user friendly interface The cost can be a barrier for some organisations, but for us it is worth it. Also they are in the process of releasing a less expensive self authoring testing tool. Read full review Likelihood to Renew
It fits out business case
Read full review
We have not only renewed our subscription three years running, but we have added the self authoring tool and are looking to expand the subscription so that we can take advantage of the managed services on a global level.
Read full review Usability
It's very easy to create new feature flags and set them properly. It is more difficult to get LaunchDarkly integrated within a distributed system so that flags can be used. Especially on stateless servers where gating features by user is not easy. Overall though, it is very easy to get started and I like how simple it is to use.
Read full review Reliability and Availability
No issue with availability at all
Read full review Performance
From what I have seen, LaunchDarkly integrates well with your code and also services you might have in your tech ecosystem. We use Jenkins for automation and we were able to use it to build pipelines to automate the control of LaunchDarkly toggles in our code.
Read full review Support Rating
The overall support is very responsive
Read full review Implementation Rating
Yes I do.
Read full review Alternatives Considered
LaunchDarkly stood out to us because it put control of the application within the hands of our engineers. We didn't want to allow business users to manipulate the production site via a third-party tool. Instead, our focus was on delivering faster as an engineering team.
Read full review
We evaluated Optimost again Adobe's similar offering (Target). The big difference between the two and the reason why BSI choose Autonomy was the managed service aspect. The idea that once the code was deployed on the site IT no longer had to be involved gave my team full ownership of the testing programme. With the Adobe product, the involvement of the internal IT group would have been required to launch each test - and this would have decreased the number of tests we could run each month. Back in the day I also used offermatica/omniture and this too required IT involvement.
Read full review Scalability
The platform didn't go down since we implemented it
Read full review Return on Investment Improved developer experience with some teams moving to Trunk-based Development. Increased deployment frequency due to smaller code releases. Validation of the technical and business value of work is achieved more quickly through smaller pieces of work and through experimenting with a small group of users before a feature gets to 100% of customers. Read full review Use HP Optimost was the primary driver behind a 40% increase in UK classroom training courses booked online read more details here: http://www.autonomy.com/work/news/details/hsx6767d HP Optimost testing led to a 9% increase in sales by improving the BSI Shop's checkout funnel in 2012 HP Optimost is integral to the success of BSI's continuous improvement testing programme Read full review ScreenShots