OpenText Operations Orchestration Reviews

Automations and integrations with several other products.

Automated the complete end-to-end process of ordering, building, and supplying servers.

Better documentation and support from HP.

4 years.

No – but architecturally the application should be well though-out across domains, firewalls and data-centers.

In 9.x, the clustering environment was very unstable. But in 10.x that has been resolved.

No – it’s fairly easy to scale.

From 1 – 10 – I think HP is about a 4. Support can be slow and frustrating.

Initial setup is complex. Mainly in architecting it. Then again, in building initial automations.

Vendor team – In 1 – 10 – was about a 7. The application was new at the time, and there wasn’t many vendors with great expertise.

It’s saved 100’s of man hours monthly.

No – we’re a pretty big HP shop.

Make sure whoever is implementing it is well versed in programming and infrastructure.

The ease of use is most valuable.

We do integration for other companies and automation is a huge, huge benefit, obviously.

The integration grid between the SA and OL needed improvement, but that was solved. Like in SA studio, we needed to have our workflows and stuff created. Then, using a batch file you had to synch and so on. But that was solved. It is all integrated.

I have been using this for about six months.

We used a previous version but that was stable. We have had no down time.

It will going to meet our needs going forward.

For us, support is really good. But then we know a lot of inside people. We don’t have to wait on the phone.

When looking for a vendor, I look for reliability. All products basically do the same thing. If you change jobs, you have the other product you have to work with that right. They all have their up and their down sides, but I think reliability is the differentiator.

Setup is quite complex, but it is a complex product. It's not Word, obviously. It took a couple of weeks to complete the project. But, it was a real small automatic deployment. Basically, what we did in that project was really straightforward, really easy. We barely used the product to it's full extent.

It makes it possible to orchestrate a key structure, to generate benefits such as money and time savings, and to increase the quality of our processes.

Four years ago, we created a new department for automation. Today, the organization has a lot of trust in us and we're placed in each strategic architecture. Everybody knows us, trusts us, and are happy to work with us. We are problem solvers and the innovation robo team.

It allows us to create our logs in a way so that we can read security issues without really having to do customization. Everything that we need comes with a default functionality.

The one feature that would be useful for us would be integration of more automation with other solutions. I think this should be possible with newer versions.

HP recognizes the need to integrate each product into one big suite. They are going to offer a new suite for flow orchestration and other processes, but the current way they bundle the products makes it really difficult for the customer to identify which products they need.

We've had no issues with deployment.

HP releases a new version every year, which is currently up to 10.54. We will integrate that version next year, but the current version we have is very stable. We have almost no problems with it.

As far as scalability goes, it has a great architecture and we're able to scale as necessary.

We have premium support in Romania and this works fine. We are completely happy with it.

Just do it. Don't think too long about it.

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.

Although we've just started using it, the automation feature, of course, is the most valuable feature for us. We also use the server exchange a bit and I use it for many routines, including rebooting systems.

We haven't really implemented it much into our processes, but it's already a time saver for us. We're able to automate various situations. For example, for three years, I've had to reboot my HP Service Manager system every week manually, taking about 30-40 minutes each time. Now, I can just press a button, wait five minutes, press the button again, and the system is upgraded.

It's not a perfect solution, such as with the customization prompts. They're a little awkward and not very intuitive.

We've had no issues with deployment.

I'd say that the stability is good. Again, the customization prompts aren't so intuitive and we made mistakes. However, we were able to fix those ourselves, but they could have been prevented.

We haven't scaled, but we have looked at it and it's quite scalable and usable for other parts of our organization. We could easily allow other people to use Orchestration.

We are planning to do it within Knowledge Management, for example, to have automated fixes in it and in Service Manager so that they can just click A or L and then run the Orchestration scenario to fix the problem.

I don't think we've ever had to contact technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. We haven't implemented it that much yet because we have a standalone server with the system, so we opened a couple of firewalls. To get the routines correct, though, it's quite complex.

I've seen ROI almost right away. There's maybe eight or ten hours of setup to get a good scenario and then that's saved up in ten weeks for me at least.

We're an HP shop and it's management's choice to use HP software.

1. Ability to integrate with with other tools like ServiceNow, HPSA, HPOM, SiteScope.

2. Gives solid platform to write flows for maintaining DevOps environments.

3. Supports multiple IT domains such as Cloud, Virtualization, SAP Orchestration, Security Ops, and DevOps.

4. Well-categorized.

It turned mundane tasks automated.

Flow that we have created does Account creation and termination when and where required.

Flow monitors the health of agents and pushes mail on daily basis.

It also self-heals and does basic remedy.

Multiple users can work on the same automation peace as it supports SCM which internally supports version-ing.

Training.

Skilled Professionals

over 4 years

We have no issues with product deployments, where sometimes we used to have few issues like every other software product. We get hot fix, patches and remedy instructions from HP. which mostly resolves issues occurred.

No. Stability is good.

With new version scalability is highly achieved. You can add additional components to existing architecture WITHOUT downtime, which is amazing.

Customer service is one of those areas that definitely needs to be improved.

3.5 out of 10

Needs improvement. HP itself needs to improve skill on this product as this is mostly sought automation tool which offers wide range of automation.

We had used HPSA and found OO can be really handy in terms of automation and started using it.

If you understand architecture, it's quite easy and you can can customize based on your need.

There is never a complexity in OO.

In my previous financial/banking firm we had HP team implementing it. Here in current accounts, I have my hand in implementing.

In my next role with different organization, I'm going to start implementation of OO. I'm excited about this and waiting for the role.

We have saved few million dollars with OO.

Big surprise is we have special GUI based screen where you ROI on every flow.

The main driver for us using this is for its event remediation function. We can get alerts in Operations Manager, extract the relevant information, and either send an email to our customers or use it for escalation. 

It's also easy to use and we don't have to go through a lot of extensive training. Even other teams within our organization have started to leverage it because it's easy to use.

We've reduced the amount of time it would take to resolve an incident or to send an escalation to a customer. It's saved us many man hours.

I'd like to see it in an active-active infrastructure so that if one goes down, the other picks up automatically. Only an active-passive application exists currently.

Also, there are automation tools out there that are more unified -- network, database, servers. Operations Orchestration doesn't do everything and you need to buy other components for other tasks.

It's deployed well for us.

It's been stable for the most part. We had issues during event remediation when a lot of alerts were going through it and we had to increase RAM and CPU to handle the load.

We haven't yet tested its limits or maxed it out yet.

We have a mix of products and it's not the only automation product we have. We're a big HP shop and it's good that it can integrate with other HP solutions that we use.

I would advise you to list all your use cases first, and really figure out what their trying to do. It's easy, is an easy orchestration tool. It's very visual. If you're not looking to code a lot, it's pretty cool. And it just depends on the level of skillset you have in the organization.

From a coding perspective, if there are open search tools out there that require more expertise than actually scripting, in this, you don't do that. You go to the studio and you drag and drop things and you make things work. So from that perspective it's easy. It's more UI driven.

As an integrator of Operations Orchestration, we find that the most valuable feature is really the support that HP provides. It also simplifies the process of creating IT assets that are essential to our customers' IT operations.

Our customers are mainly mid- to small-sized companies. Operations Orchestration, I think, is most useful there because they don't have huge IT departments. It's easy to use in creating IT assets that ultimately help business growth.

It's also something that allows you to secure cloud assets from start to finish and to have complete security control over it.

In order for our customers to have a deeper integration of Operations Orchestration, it needs to be offered with more cloud options, whether that's public or private or hybrid. I think this would be a great direction for HP to go in.

I'd also like HP to be more proactive in telling us what their roadmap is for this product. It's a market-leading solution so there are a lot of users, but, as with all solutions, greater visibility of what's coming would be a good improvement.

We haven't had any problems deploying it.

It's highly stable.

It's scaled for our projects.

Technical seems to be just fine. There's no data that says otherwise.

It's usually an implementation done by the HP folks.