Microsoft Project Server Reviews

Microsoft Project Server has generated various outcomes regarding investment value. Some companies experience a 1-1.5 year return if existing processes are in place, while others anticipate about three years. Users observe significant returns, with several noting improvement in investment metrics. In government sectors, its worth is evaluated based on operational efficiency rather than purely financial results, highlighting the advantage it affords in achieving objectives. Overall, users agree that Microsoft Project Server achieves favorable investment returns.

Microsoft Project Server pricing varies widely, influenced by factors such as deployment options and specific user needs. Licensing typically involves CALs for on-premises use, with additional SQL and Windows Server costs. Some users find it affordable, while others face high costs, particularly for enterprise or premium features. The solution offers both subscription and perpetual licensing models. Despite potential expense, many find its functionality justifies the investment compared to alternatives like Primavera or Planview.

• "We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft, and our licensing is based on the agreement."
• "The product is expensive."
• "A standard license is cheaper, but if you want more features, then there is a premium license or professional license."

Organizations primarily use Microsoft Project Server for project management and planning, handling timelines, resource allocation, financial reporting, and milestone tracking. They manage project lifecycles from ideation to execution, using Microsoft Project Server's features for scheduling, documentation control, portfolio analysis, and capacity planning. Companies utilize it for centralized management, collaborating across departments, and integrating with tools like Dynamics 365. Its flexibility allows access online, on mobile, and on-premises, facilitating project oversight and implementation across various industries.

Microsoft Project Server's customer service and support are generally considered good, with many rating technical support highly. Some users note slow response times and repetitive questioning from support representatives, while others appreciate quick problem-solving for critical issues. Availability of support is wide due to a high number of partners. Documentation is rated well. Satisfaction varies, with some finding online support ineffective and service quality dependent on the chosen plan.

Microsoft Project Server's initial setup varies in complexity. Some found it straightforward, especially with prior experience or online guidance. Others required third-party assistance due to its intricacies, particularly with integration with SharePoint. Customization needs and a hybrid environment can add difficulty. Deployment time ranges from a few days to several months depending on organizational needs, resources, and configurations. Maintenance often necessitates a small team, while cloud-based setups are typically simpler.

Many find Microsoft Project Server scalable, handling medium to large user numbers well. Some report no issues even at high capacities, while others face limitations and potential high costs. On-premise versions may struggle with performance, but Project Online offers better scalability. Organizations planning to expand project capacity or user base seem optimistic about its ability to adapt, though some see room for improvement in ease of scaling and infrastructure dependency.

Microsoft Project Server is generally stable, reliable, and scales well. Many note stable performance, particularly in cloud versions. Some users mention occasional bugs, slow performance with larger projects, or issues depending on provider infrastructure. Some have faced performance delays, particularly with Nintex workflow integration. Others experienced difficulties in older versions or with increased scale, although newer versions have shown improvements. Stability ratings vary, with several giving scores between seven to ten out of ten.