CAST Highlight Reviews

Some find CAST Highlight profitable over a two-year span, though one entity considers it too early to comment. Many have seen a return on investment, while others note time-saving benefits without specifically mentioning ROI.

CAST Highlight is considered expensive by many users, with standard licensing fees covering basic support and additional costs for upgrades. Users pay per scan annually with no setup fees, and the pricing does not vary by scan size. Despite being less expensive than CAST AIP, it remains costly, with professional services adding to the expense. While some users do not find it either expensive or cheap, others rate it as high as eight or nine out of ten for cost.

• "CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
• "CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."
• "It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."

Organizations primarily use CAST Highlight for evaluating architecture and understanding replatforming needs, especially during mergers and acquisitions. They utilize it to assess application quality, software decline, and cloud readiness. It is also used to address open source safety, perform software completion analysis, classify indicators differentiating from competitors, and assess risks in code bases. These actions help with application lifecycle management and automatic function measurement. CAST Highlight serves as a key tool in cloud migration planning.

CAST Highlight's customer service is often praised for being quite helpful, with their technical team providing good assistance. While some users find their support team knowledgeable, others feel they focus on ticket closure rather than meeting needs. Availability and local support are good, though occasional difficulties in communication and understanding issues are noted. Some teams experience challenges due to varying levels of tool expertise among support members.

CAST Highlight's initial setup is generally straightforward, though some faced challenges due to multiple source locations. Installation is easy for some, especially those with experience, while others noted a learning curve. Initial deployment of many applications took longer initially but is now faster with familiarity. Users agree that subscribing and configuring CAST Highlight is simple, contrasting with other CAST products like CAST AIP, which are perceived as more complex.

CAST Highlight demonstrates robust scalability. Users have faced no major issues, even with complex cases involving large codebases. Several teams find it well-suited for enterprise needs, enabling broad access within their organizations and interest in increased application. Although extensive stress testing hasn't always been performed, current usage scenarios report smooth operation across multiple users. It is noted for effectively supporting numerous team members and enterprises aiming for extensive deployment.

CAST Highlight is regarded as stable by users. It operates reliably on a daily basis, even handling multiple builds. While it performs well with most languages, complex coding may present challenges. Users have experienced no significant performance issues or errors, aside from data transfer complications. Some bugs have been encountered, but these have not affected consistent operation. Stability has been maintained without major issues, affirming its effectiveness in steady environments.