Likelihood to Recommend SiteScope is definitely well suited in an HP server environment. It is also well suited for virtual server environments. It is also well suited for those who are happy with email and text based message alerting. It may not be appropriate in other environments where monitoring physical components is critical. Because HP SiteScope does not monitor certain physical components, it does fall short of being able to be a "one stop shop solution" in regard to monitoring. It is not well suited for those looking for logic in how alerts are sent and cascade to other people or groups.
Read full review In our organization, we are using ServiceNow extensively. Change Management, Incident Management, Problem Management, Time tracking are few modules which we use extensively. This sort of model will work for any product or service based companies as the product is built on ITIL framework. So this product will be suited for small or large scale companies to better organize and add controls and track SLA's for technology or business process.
Read full review Pros Alerts can be configured as per business requirement. It can take remedial action, when defined for a particular situation. Severity, priority of tickets which are created upon a trigger can be well defined. The teams which need to be alerted can be configured in the tool itself, in case of any event. Read full review When I have a number of requests to make, for example a request to add a dozen or so user accounts to more than one group account in Active Directory , I can put all the needed information into the initial form, add it to my "shopping cart" and all of that information remains on the screen for the next item for which I only need to edit a few items (like the AD group name in this example), and keep adding them to the shopping cart until I have them all. When I "Check Out" each of those items is generated as a separate task under the one request. It simplifies and expedites the creation and tracking of these kinds of requests. I can easily and quickly see what tickets are currently assigned to me in order to prioritize them and remain aware of my workload. Numerous fields for CIs can be used when trying to find the entry for a particular item. For example, IP Address, server name, raw text, classification, and so on. To help with making sense out of related tasks, when a task is assigned to me and I need to open another task for a different team to work in order to complete my task, I can open a sub-task from my ticket so that the relationship between the two can be pulled up later into reports. For example, I may have a task to build a new vm, and need to open tasks for networking, security accounts, software installation and so on. By opening sub-tasks from my assignment, the time spent by all parties concerned is tied together for more meaningful cost accounting. Read full review Cons Sitescope is particularly used for infrastructure monitoring. Other kinds of monitors cannot be set using HP sitescope. Sitescope cannot have graphs like splunk which is why we have splunk as well which is an additional cost for the company. We can't have a direct regex operations on data inside HP sitescope. We need to have the logs placed as a single log and then do that. Read full review It is hard to find areas for improvement, the tool is very powerful. That said, building the CMDB still involves some manual interaction which was not how it was presented in demos. The CMDB data is almost too deep and detailed. When you build the relationship map it can be so large that it is overwhelming. You can limit this, but the default maps are massive if you are discovering lots of device classes. The product is expensive. Since they are the leader in the industry and the product has tons of features, they definitely charge for it! Read full review Likelihood to Renew To be completely honest setting up a new ticketing system can be a pain in the ass. Once you have it setup and customized the way you want it, you don't want to switch unless you're unhappy with the product. Unless future releases and updates really muck the system up, I wouldn't change.
Read full review Usability Very straightforward and easy to use once you get past the short learning curve.
Read full review The dashboard is so confusing, [there are] many clicks to open a task and search by a ticket. The Enterprise customisation [we did] has finished to kill the software and creates a really bad experience on a daily basis. [It is] So slow, and so many clicks to process a ticket. Works only on IE so, that [should] make you realize that [it] is a bad idea.
Read full review Reliability and Availability We have never had any issues with ServiceNow's availability that I am aware of in the two years I have been using it.
Read full review Performance For a massive system, page loads are reasonably quick, including searches.
Read full review Support Rating Can't really answer this. Setup was easy and no support has really been used at this point.
Read full review I would give it this rating because we have had no major issues with the support for ServiceNow after we implemented it at our organization. They seem to respond promptly and efficiently if we ever do need to open a support case with them about an issue we are having.
Read full review Online Training To type in what should be a text box, you have to click an empty cell, a tiny text box pop up opens with a check box and an X. You the. Type in the text box and have to click the check mark. If you have a bunch of fields to fill out, doing this is very annoying. Absolutely know thought went in to this. I'm sure somebody in marketing thought it was a good idea. It wasn't.
Read full review Implementation Rating Without exception, every client I have worked with has been very happy with their resulting product. While this is partly due to my work, I must point out that the platform is the winning decision, not the implementer.
Read full review Alternatives Considered SiteScope unified console is a powerful tool for operators to easily detect warnings and alerts grouped by its hierarchical organization with real-time status displaying continuously the whole health map.
Read full review We used to use
Jira to handle service tickets but it's way too robust for something this straightforward. Due to the nature of
Jira , you needed to already have a lot of documentation and knowledge about who should be assigned the ticket, so the lift of creating a ticket was time consuming.
Read full review Scalability ServiceNow works as an enterprise solution.
Read full review Return on Investment Sitescope does exactly what it was purchased for. It may take some time to set it up but once its set up it is a rock solid product. Read full review Overall ServiceNow has a positive impact on getting the SLA of tickets down in supporting our customers. One negative impact has been the amount of time to get the product to produce an ROI, it's almost too big to fail and too big to replace. You almost become committed to the product. Good or bad. Another negative impact would be if you track metrics of employees and time tracking, there is a lot of scenarios where engineers will track time on tickets but not get credit for closing them as the assignee function of tickets can only be tied to one user and credits only the engineer who closes the ticket. Another positive impact would be the level of security for permissions and scaling the workloads is robust and you will get out of the system what your team is willing to put in. Read full review ScreenShots