Remedyforce is being used to outsource our helpdesk maintenance and attempt to get use more ITIL compliant in our processes. It is being used across the organization not only for our managed accounts but also or general IT support. The biggest problem it has addressed is that it has gotten us out of supporting a ticketing solution and overly customizing one also.
As a programmer,, I found the REST API implementation the best I've seen. It's given me fine-grain field level control over records while maintaining schema meta-data server side versus classic SOAP implementations.
I'm impressed with the Schema tool and the Developer Console ... both tools have proven to help diagnose/debug issues and in some cases reverse engineer the schema.
The uptime of the product from a SAAS perspective has been good .. the ability to have a staging preliminary instance to test with that doesn't effect production has proven very helpful for testing new ideas/designs.
A primary feature of Remedy that our support teams used frequently was a block closure .. where many incidents could be closed at once and the cost of incident closure could be amortized over 10's or 100's of incidents. The feature is missing from RemedyForce and desperately needed.
There are many "out of the box" triggers that don't appear to be configurable .. that might be an access issue .. however I find that I have to spend time finding ways around the default actions of the product to get it to do what I want.
I think the positive impact is that it has forced our global business to consolidate on one ticketing solution. The two major development/management sites are Atlanta and Brisbane, Australia and by standardizing the monitoring integration with the back end being RemedyForce we have like cut down on the overall cost of maintaining duplicate in-house ticketing solutions.
Perhaps for a pure help desk ticketing system this will work perfectly. However, when connecting a monitoring system to the ticketing system happens, to some degree the requirements of the product changes. Ideally monitoring systems wouldn't "spew" tons of tickets but only what's needed. However the reality is that monitoring systems require constant tuning to achieve this ideal and many man hours of time. When that time and effort isn't spent on the monitoring system, "spew" is what happens and what is really needed here in RemedyForce is missing - block or multi-incident closure workflow.