OpenText Operations Orchestration Reviews

The solution enables managing all different types of servers; Unix server or a Windows server. This is a very significant advantage of this solution.

It is easier to manage all the servers, and you can automate processes at one time for all these types of servers, which is very useful.

It is scalable. We started with a low number of servers and now we have more than 20,000 different servers.

Sometimes, it can be difficult because when we open a case with level one support, the questions are always the same, so it's a bit boring to say the same things. However, afterwards, at level two or level three communication, we can talk to a very good expert. They have helped us very quickly.

We wanted a solution for the network, but beforehand we didn't have the global tools for that, so we needed to locate a designer solution.

The setup is a little bit complex, as the first time we needed some help from HPE support, but afterwards on repeating the process it became easier.

Perhaps we should investigate other software that we haven't yet used and evaluate any advantages in that. I just wanted to gather the relevant information regarding the features of the HPE solution, but we weren't comparing it to other vendor solutions.

It depends which solution you require but in general, the HPE solution is very useful, but sometimes it's more difficult with other solutions.

It's very simple to use even though you may require several days to become familiar with the solution. After getting good information about the product, it is simpler to use.

It brings everything together in one method screen from which you can create all the services.

I would like to see a bit more in the UX. It needs to be a bit more up-to-date. The version we've got is pretty new. It could do with a bit of a web-content makeover.

We use a lot of HPE’s software, the main point being that a lot of the server hardware based tools we used are using very new, integrated web pages whereas the HPE SA and OO are looking quite old, still fat client based and prone to some unfortunate service issues. Maybe we are not using the latest version and these are addressed, it was just a major point I thought was worth addressing.

I've been using the solution since I started working at my current organization about nine months ago.

The solution is fairly stable. We do have some internal problems with the sizing and stability of certain components.

The tool is highly scalable. It can grow as big you want it to.

I don't deal with the support directly, but the people who work with them don't seem to have much of a problem. It's a fairly quick process to get to the right level of support.

This solution was just pushed through when the actual cloud team was put together. We were already HPE partners.

I wasn’t really involved in the setup. But it's quite a basic setup. It's not that complex.

This solution basically does everything that we need it to do. It does it pretty well.

When choosing a vendor, I look for end-to-end support throughout the product life-cycle. We need a clear strategy on what the company's doing and how to align that to the way we want to go.

The automation, hands down. That's the future of our company and the direction we're going in. We are trying to automate as many of the processes as possible, so instead of taking two weeks to deploy a server it takes 15 minutes.

We started with our VM systems, and now we're looking at physical systems. Also, in my area of expertise is monitoring, so within that flow, we also deploy monitoring as well as part of the automated service. Based on a matter of minutes, rather than a matter of days. Huge benefit.

It's cost effective. The time you get the applications up and running generates more revenue for the company sooner. Also personnel, it doesn't require as many people to be involved. Of course, money is number one within the company. But yet, just the pure time and the time it takes to get infrastructure up, going and ready.

We have such a huge environment. When we're standing up new applications, new systems or existing applications, we've got to find ways to make things faster to keep up with demand, keep up with the competitors, and to be the leading institution in our industry. Definitely always finding new ways to make things faster and better. Of course, that eliminates human error. When we automate, everyone knows exactly what to expect, from the process, rather than introducing a point of failure - human error.

I'm not quite sure, because the toolsets that are introduced out of the box are very helpful. Once you get that learning curve, when it clicks, it's kind of like a game to me. Once you have the personnel who can really get into it and really enjoy it and make things better, I really cannot find any specific examples for you to say that I wish this was better, because it offers you so many options. You're developing something so it's kind of how you want to do it. There's so many different ways that you can develop your flow, so they have a ton of options for you.

I'm not a developer by trade. I actually come from an operations background. I have a little bit of scripting experience, and when I took this on, we actually had a contractor come in and guide the work. Once he did that, and then once they left, I took over those flows and just thrown out there in the water. Sink or swim. When you have to do it, it was something I picked up in a really quick. Once it clicked, we were off. We just kept going.

You have to have a subject matter expert. You have to have that SME to have that mindset of a developer. You need to have someone with some development experience. Not saying you have to, because it can be learned, but it is easier to have someone to have that experience and to have that mindset. But you do have to have that dedicated resource, I guess you could say to stay on top of it, because if you don't stay into it, once you create these flows, and if they're very customized, some of them in my experience can get quite large. You have to keep up with what's being added, what's being updated and know exactly what's going on, because over time you can kind of forget things that are happening within the automations.

We have had some issues with memory usage, but that's something that we beefed up and made the system more robust. We added new servers, and actually helped tremendously. We created guidelines around how the flow should be created to sustain stability, because if you have folks who introduce to many bugs to their flows, it can actually bring the system down. We have a team that monitors it.

It's exploding as more and more departments start using the application, we add more servers. I think of you need that directive from senior management. As long as it's something that the company wants, and they want to move forward with, you'll get the resources for it.

Usually what I do is I contact the team that oversees the product, and if there's any issues, then they would contact HP, which I think they have done a few times. I've never heard any complaints from them about it.

I didn't have any involvement with the deployment of the application, so I'm not sure.

I'm not at the level to know why they chose Orchestration. But since they've chosen it, it's been a great tool. Very powerful tool. Introduced a lot of flexibility within the company. Something we've been very pleased with. It's really exploded within the company.

Have someone create guidelines. Make sure you have the folks who have that development mindset. Just have those guidelines to keep the stability, because once you start it, you really need someone to have the experience to guide the folks into it. But once they see what the features are out of the box, how to create those flows, and once they get started, then I think it's pretty easy.

The ability to basically create any type of flow I want to, go and get the root cause, and to control workflow without people having to know everything that needs to be done. People make too many mistakes. Then I can also use it to find the root cause when an event actually occurs. It allows me to do repetitive tasks consistently.

It actually really comes down to a quicker mean time to recover. More consistent data being captured to identify what the issues are and also a tighter control over work process flows.

It annoys me because you have to create everything in one development environment and then push it out to the run-time engines, but anything that has the power or capabilities of what OO does, it almost has to be two separate entities. It's easy for people who don't know what they're doing from a logical perspective to really screw things up.

You can build some safety features and everything into it where that doesn't happen, but really primarily what you do is you limit the amount of people who develop the flows. That way you stay consistent.

If you're running it in a Windows environment, you're tied to the inefficiency and quirkiness of Windows. No system that the first answer from support is reboot It, should be a production server.

I've been dealing with Operations Orchestration ever since HP bought it and in my opinion, there's really not a whole lot of competition that works well with inside the HP software environment. Like I said, we are an HP software and hardware site for the most part. Also, we have the expertise there.

Once you understand what you have to do to do it and you have the proper mechanisms and security restrictions removed to do it, then no. If you go and have somebody new try to deploy it, it is a fairly complex deployment structure. Like I said, that's where it comes back to if you know what you're doing and know how to do it and if you have the proper securities, it's fine. If you don't, it's a nightmare.

Have someone who understands the environment not only from a data perspective and tactical perspective, but also from the security and from operations, because really it is an operational tool that helps you and if you don't know how operations works, you'll never create a flow that's right.

• Compliance scans
• Adhoc automation scripts that can be deployed on wide variety of OS flavors

It has made the implementation of our IT software policies faster.

• Product installation
• Audits
• Monitoring section

I've been using it for four years.

Lots of issues due to a lack of details, and huge documentation.

We had issued, specifically with the compliance scans component. This part of the product needs improvement as it tends to impact the overall stability of the solution.

Not much, it does a somewhat better job on scalability.

Below average, 2/10. A lot is needed to be improved upon in their customer service.

On a few things it is excellent, but mostly I would rate it as average, 3/10.

I have worked on solutions offered by different OS vendors like RedHat Satellite but HP consolidates all OS based solutions into one single solution.

The application is very complex thus making initial setup also very complex

We had to involve HP to setup and their expertise is great.

• Bladelogic
• IBM

Initial setup is very crucial and before implementing you should have a clear vision on how to use it for the following two years. Setup processes on the usage, at the initial stages, as it is hard to change that at later stages considering the complexity involved.

This tool addresses all our disparate capabilities, bringing all those systems together. We’ve been able to orchestrate per product, and tie those things together to automate processes that were manual in the past. It allows us to turn around systems a lot quicker and in a repeatable way.

Previous to this solution, there were a lot of manual processes that allowed for human error. Now it is automated and more repeatable. We're still not perfect, but the tool allows us to keep improving constantly.

One area is support. The other one is the release of new products that emerge in the market. This tool is set up such that it encompasses third-party integrations that can be slow. I would like to see the introduction of new products to market and getting support for the application as quickly as possible.

We have been using this solution for about two years.

We don't use it in a heavy duty way, but it seems robust enough from what we've experienced in the last two years.

This tool is not known for scalability. We don't use it that heavily. As far as we know, the architecture is scalable. That was part of our decision to go this route. It has yet to be proven in the field.

We have used technical support and we've had our ups and downs with them. We've had questions for support and they've been really helpful. We get to the right level, but we sometimes find that we struggle to get support for a new product or a capability in which we are having issues. Generally, they're okay, but there are still areas of struggle.

The installation is straightforward. To be fair, HPE has looked to improve that process over the last couple of iterations. Overall, it's been fine.

We have looked into several other technologies, but we have a lot of HPE tool sets today and we find that the off-the-shelf integrations are good. That is our predominant reason for using the HPE tools.

Even though there are a lot of other technologies that compete in this space, this solution is the right fit for now. In terms of licenses, they work well for the way in which we use the products.

When I select a vendor, I generally look for the following key items:

• Maturity
• The correct Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) models
• The right development roadmap
• That products are moving in the right direction

We are using this solution for change management and incident management.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the sustainability and the simplicity around the usage.

The improvisation in the previous version was very stable, and the features that were built around this particular product are very good.

The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high.

I have been using Operations Orchestration for approximately 15 years.

We are using the latest version.

It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both.

We have more than 50,000 users in our organization.

We have a team of 15 IT members who take care of the front and backend of this solution.

We have a handbook that we use to complete the installation. 

We haven't come across anything major as a part of the installation. The installation is straightforward. 

We can reach out to Micro Focus support if we come across any difficulties.

We have completed parts of the installation ourselves and have reached out to Micro Focus for other areas of the integration.

The cost is very high compared to anything else available.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

We will continue to use this product, providing we get the premium rates. If they change our premium rates then we will consider switching.

I would rate Operations Orchestration an eight out of ten.