Microsoft Project Server Reviews

I've spent the last five years as the Director of Consultations for a firm that specializes in Microsoft project implementation. Our clients include significant corporations from all throughout Russia. During this time, my daily responsibilities were around project oversight and working as a project manager, particularly for implementation projects. I also served as the architect for these solutions.

We have been using the latest version, both on-premises and cloud which is particularly famous in Russia.

In the competitive landscape of project management and portfolio management solutions, Microsoft Project Server stands out significantly. Despite a mature market with numerous competitive products, Microsoft's advantage lies in its seamless integration with the desktop Microsoft Project application. This desktop application has global popularity and is often the initial choice for customers to manage their small projects. As their projects and departments grow, the need for project server applications becomes apparent. Microsoft Project Server fits this need perfectly, allowing users to transition smoothly from the desktop application to the server environment.

Unlike many competitors who offer only web interfaces for their solutions, Microsoft Project Server uniquely enables users to work within the familiar user interface of the desktop application. This feature is particularly appealing to customers as it ensures continuity and ease of use. Microsoft Project Server has this advantage in comparison to its competitors in the field.

Microsoft is undergoing a shift in its approach. They're diverting their investments away from Microsoft Project Server's development and are focusing on a new solution based on Microsoft Power Apps. This new solution is exclusively cloud-based and can't be installed on-premises. While Microsoft Power Apps are technologically sophisticated, the cloud functionality is currently less sophisticated compared to the existing Microsoft Project Server solution on-premise. It appears that Microsoft's primary goal is to migrate as much functionality as possible from the legacy on-premises Microsoft Project Server to the new cloud-based Power Apps solution. 

I have been working with Microsoft Project Server for the last five years in Russia.

It is highly scalable. I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

The solution is easily scalable, however, it has some bugs. I can rate it a nine out of ten.

It is difficult to install Microsoft Project Server. I would rate the installation a three out of ten. The deployment takes almost three to four hours.

We needed almost three to four consulting developers.

I would rate the price a six out of ten. 

There should be significant organizational changes that are necessary to implement it. It should be more about the internal organizational interest of your company for the successful implementation of Microsoft Project Server. Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

I like being able to manage the capacity in terms of the resources. I also like being able to share documents and information between teams. It's the best solution for collaboration.

When we started using this solution from scratch, we got lost. Microsoft should provide some templates for configurations for certain use cases.

I've been using this solution for six years.

It's a stable solution. The cloud version in particular is very stable.

Microsoft Project Server is a scalable solution. We have 25 people using it.

The initial setup is straightforward if you are familiar with the Chatbot solution of Microsoft.

The initial deployment took about six months because I was working on other projects at the same time.

We deployed the solution ourselves. Our team consisted of four engineers.

Microsoft Project Server is an expensive solution. Small businesses will not be able to afford it.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Project Server at six out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for plans and projects. I use it to handle timelines and scheduling. It's primarily used for project implementation. We use it to improve and keep track of project status.

The user interface is okay. It's fine to navigate for a layperson.

As an end-user, I haven't gotten too technical with it.

It is stable.

The solution can scale. 

I don't have any specific notes for improvement. I do not require any more functionality.

I've had some issues with Project Server from time to time. It is not updated in real-time. Sometimes it, therefore, is not accurate.

Technical support could be more efficient. 

I've been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is okay. It has some issues with lagging. I'd rate the general stability eight or nine out of ten.

The scalability is good. I'd rate it nine out of ten. It extends well. 

At my previous company, many people used the solution, including managers and coordinators. 

Technical support often asks the same questions over and over. We'll get referred to a new person, and they will ask the same questions, which can be frustrating.

While problems do get solved, sometimes the response time is slow, and the process is repetitive. 

The initial setup of the solution was something I did not take part in.

The pricing is affordable. It's not overly expensive. 

I've only used Project Server and have not compared it to others.

I did work for a Microsoft gold partner.

I keep the solution up to date. I recently updated it in February.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

When it comes to enterprise projects, we need a consolidated environment where we can interlink all project management activities, including the cost, resources, timeline, and the whole landscape of project management and portfolio management. We needed enterprise resource planning, and we implemented this for the organization.

It helps us integrate the projects. We can handle cost analysis, resource analysis, task analysis, and all the basic factors that should be covered and are important for any project.

Resource management and cost management are very critical features for us.

It can scale well.

Technical support is helpful.  

The solution needs to be much more stable. 

The project support is missing. We tend to use Primavera as opposed to MS Project when we are doing engineering or large-scale projects. 

I've used the solution for six years or so. 

It isn't stable enough. This is something Microsoft needs to work on. 

The solution is quite scalable. It extends well. 

Technical support has been very good. We are pleased with their level of support.

We have used Primavera in place of Microsoft Project on a few projects. 

It is not too complex to set up. It is actually pretty straightforward. 

We have noted an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is moderate. Something like Primavera is more expensive. 

I am not using the latest version. I'm on the 2017 version. 

If you have a Microsoft environment and aren't working on too complex a project, it is quite good and a solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I am using Microsoft Project Server for managing projects, such as all the tasks-related activities are tracked.

When a project is complicated this solution monitors every task allowing us to have better control of the projects.

The most valuable feature of the Microsoft Project Server is the level of detail with which I can break down a task and check the dependencies.

The solution could improve the ease of access could improve. It can be time-consuming.

I have been using Microsoft Project Server for approximately one year.

I rate Microsoft Project Server a seven out of ten.

Everyone in the company has projects, and everyone needs approvals from everyone in the company. They need to handle approvals, rejections, cost estimates, project timelines, et cetera. This is an investment company, and all of the projects and related items are handled by Microsoft Projects and Power BI. This solution allows the CEO to see what's happening in subsidiaries in the company. 

The solution has lots of features, and they are used by various people. They are all useful and important. 

It's a stable, reliable product.

The solution scales well. 

Technical support has been helpful and responsive.

The initial setup is complex. 

There need to be more tutorials available to users. It's very robust software with lots of features. If you don't know the shortcuts or the application, it's more difficult. Having training and tutorials would make learning it and accessing features easier. 

I've been using the solution for one year.

It's stable and reliable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is a scalable solution. It's not an issue at all. 

We've used Fast Track. The Fast Track in Microsoft is a very good service. Their support is also very good. There are partners here in Egypt, and they are good partners. We have been satisfied with the level of service on offer.

We have a hybrid setup, which makes the implementation a little bit more complex. It took us a while to set everything up.

I'd recommend the solution to others. We've been happy with the solution in general. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Project Server for everything to do with projects management, such as portfolio and program management.

Microsoft Project Server has improved our organization by providing visibility of all project portfolios in one place.

Microsoft Project Server could improve by making the solution more user-friendly.

I have been using Microsoft Project Server for approximately seven years.

Microsoft Project Server's stability is good.

I have found the scalability of Microsoft Project Server to be great.

We have approximately 20 people using this solution in my company. Other companies have hundreds and thousands of users using it.

The technical support for Microsoft Project Server and the support is very good. Microsoft support is working very well.

I rate the support from Microsoft Project Server a five out of five.

The initial setup of Microsoft Project Server is simple if you know how to do it, but if you're not familiar with this technology, it will be complex.

I rate the initial setup complexity of the Microsoft Project Server a four out of five.

Initial deployment can be done within two or three weeks, but the deployment needs to improve when new requirements are needed.

One person is enough for the deployment and maintenance of the solution. However, they will have to have the knowledge needed in different technologies and know about project management methodology. 

There is a subscription model for different types of users for different types of roles.

This solution will not continue to be developed because it is going to the cloud.

I rate Microsoft Project Server an eight out of ten.

We are using it for building Research and Development Project labs.

It has been helpful for calculating the time of completion of our projects and looking at the critical parts of our projects.

The ability to look at resource loading is most valuable.

Collaboration within the tool is lacking when you compare it to online or cloud-based tools.

We should be able to notify assignees about the tasks that have been assigned to them. This is something that we don't have, and it could be because of the way it was deployed for us.

I have been using this solution for about five years.

It is pretty stable.

It seems scalable to me.

I don't have any experience with them.

It was our company's decision to switch to this. With my previous employer, I have used different solutions. Smartsheet is one of them.

I did not deploy it myself. I am an end-user. We have an IT organization for its deployment.

You have to define your use case and see if this tool makes sense for your use case or not. 

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

My clients are mostly using Microsoft Project Server for infrastructure-type projects management as a scheduling tool.

Microsoft Project Server helps organizations in collaboration.

The scheduling tool is useful.

I have been using Microsoft Project Server for a number of years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the scalability of the Microsoft Project Server to be good.

We have approximately 10 to 20 uses using this solution in my organization and we plan to increase usage. We do consult for clients and we are always looking for more business.

The technical support is good.

We previously used Oracle Primavera.

The initial setup was complex.

We used consultants for the implementation of the solution.

We have approximately two people that do the maintenance and support of the solution.

I have seen a return on investment from the use of this solution, it has been good.

The price of the Microsoft Project Server could improve, it is expensive here in Africa. When comparing Microsoft Project Server to Oracle Primavera for us, Microsoft Project Server is quite cost-effective.

I noticed recently there are lots of new solutions coming out, but I don't know if they offer solutions that are more for agile product management. This would be a benefit if there were.

I rate Microsoft Project Server an eight out of ten.

I am a Project Server Administrator and BI Analyst. I work extensively with Microsoft Project Server. We are currently on the 2013 on-prem version, which is currently two versions back. We are in the process of migrating to Project Online, which will in the Microsoft cloud.

We use Project Server to track enterprise-level projects and implement projects. As a financial institution or credit union service organization, we have over 1,800 member credit unions. We use Project Server to manage our enterprise projects where we're building, modifying, and maintaining products, which are then implemented by our implementations teams. They use Project Server for their checklists and for their project management during implementations. We also use it to track costs in our enterprise projects.

It brings all the information and all the data about our projects into one location. It helps us in providing holistic reporting and trends analysis across projects through the entire enterprise.

Project schedule management is very good. Basically, it sits on SharePoint. So, every time we create a project, a new project site is created within that SharePoint environment, which is a very good document repository. It allows us to create issues and risks lists and additional functionality to keep track of what's going on with projects.

The reporting aspects can be improved, which is one of the reasons why I'm using Qlik Sense. In the older on-prem versions, reporting was lackluster, to say the least. Project Online has a better handle on that. However, we will still be using Qlik Sense as the licensing model for native PowerBI reporting is a bit restrictive and expensive for a small enterprise(under 250 users of the tool). We're also looking at an add-on app from OnePlan that adds additional functionality and thord party app connectors as Microsoft is not as clean in its approach for functions such as portfolio management and some of the trend analysis we need.

At this company, I have been using it for about seven years. I've also used Project Server in different organizations previously. 

It is very stable when it is properly configured. When it is not properly configured, it can be a nightmare, just like many programs. In terms of moving to Project Online, we expect a lot better stability. That's because it is being managed by Microsoft, and it will be under their control. We'll be under their supervision. They're going to make sure that it runs properly because they'll have thousands of clients running the same software at the same time, so they've got to be stable across the board. The current on-prem is reasonably stable. It is just we've outgrown it. It is two versions behind, and we need to get into a better situation for the long term.

The older on-prem versions are not as scalable as we would like. Performance starts to suffer a bit when you get too many projects and too many resources in it, but Project Online is supposed to be much more scalable. In fact, we won't have to really manage that side of the house at all. It is going to be a matter of Microsoft keeping things running well and us just not pushing configurations that are unusual.

Currently, we have about 1,600 users. They are different aspects of the business, such as IT, project management, etc. The usage of the older versions that are on-prem is decreasing simply because Microsoft is pushing everybody to the cloud. The on-prem versions are still out there. There are still a lot of large organizations that like to stay on-prem because they like to have better control over their data. It has a pretty widely used set of applications across the entire spectrum, but the on-prem servers and such are starting to migrate more toward Project Online.

We're primarily working with our vendor, and they've been very good. We've had no real problems with them.

There was a partial implementation of Primavera, which was primarily used by our IT group for timesheets. We were probably only using 5% of the capabilities of the product, but in terms of cost-effectiveness and overall usability within our infrastructure, Project Server became a better option. Prior to that, we had standalone project plans using MS Project, a standalone client, and spreadsheets.

It was complex. It took us months, but that was primarily because we had a very stripped-down version. It was basically a quick standup for us that was not properly configured. When we went really committed to the platform, we had to undo a lot of stuff and do a lot of analysis in order to make sure that we were reconfiguring the product into a usable state for ourselves. So, a good chunk of that month was in terms of analyzing business processes and options.

In terms of maintenance of our on-prem version, our vendor handles 90% of maintenance. I don't think they end up having to do quite a lot. It is mainly keeping the servers active, and currently, that system is out of support. So, it is mainly maintaining the operating systems on the servers and just watching disk drive space, etc. In terms of maintenance within the system, we probably put in four to five hours a week for just maintaining resource profiles, answering questions, and providing general support for the user base.

We use consultants. In fact, our current on-prem solution is hosted by our consulting vendor, and they manage all of the systems on the AWS cloud. Our experience with them was good. In fact, we are using them to help us migrate to Project Online at this point.

I'm not quite sure about the licensing costs. We're probably paying somewhere in the neighborhood of about 80,000 to 90,000 a year for our current on-prem because we handle our own licensing. As far as Project Online is concerned, we're still trying to get a good handle on that. It looks like it is going to be in a neighborhood of about 120,000 to 150,000 a year, but we're getting a lot more capability out of it.

We have an enterprise agreement. We've got a pretty large enterprise using the whole suite of Microsoft products. We have probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 2,600 to 2,800 people who are using either Microsoft OS, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Exchange, or something along that line.

Planview, ChangePoint, Monday.com

The biggest item of advice would be to really understand your business and what your real needs are and then compare Microsoft Project Server or Project Online to some of the other offerings out there. If you are going to be in a more robust and complicated set of project processes, Project Server is probably a very good fit for you. If you're only into lightweight project management, it may be a little bit overkill.

I'm still trying to get a feel of the overall functionality of Project Online. We are going to be putting an add-on product on top of it to kind of fill in some of the gaps. 

Currently, I'm going to rate it an eight out of 10.