Microsoft Project Server Reviews

Our primary use case would be to reset out projects online during the process and be able to use the Project Pro to run or exhibit projects which are already planned as part of the process of project management.

It improves the managing function with this product.

I think the division between the onsite work on the cloud of Microsoft Office is something valuable. It is used for consulting assignments. I think that people are more used to the Microsoft inner-workings. They use Excel, and the other Office products, so it is easily adaptable. In addition, it is easily used on mobile applications.

I think stability is good but I think there's quite some amount of activity towards integration with SharePoint.  So, the institution in terms of collaborating and sharing projects, I think that's something that needs to be worked on in the future.

In terms of the performance, I think it's something that took a big toll on the service when a lot of people logged in finally, so that's something that can be improved in the future.

They were good, but they took quite some time to resolve a ticket. We figured it out with our own tech support. The issue was a performance issue, so we could see our position taking a longer time to load because it would generally take three seconds. At the max, it was taking more than ten seconds for the application to load. Eventually, we got it resolved through a Microsoft tech service technician on-site.

It was already implemented, but it had to be customized. We did some customization, along with some approvals along with the Share Point. So, it was a little more complex implementation. In terms of creating forms for users to log in with their information, as well as integrating Share Point with Project, we had to research how to create a flow between these two platforms. Initially, there were problems with the integration of the two.

The licensing was procured before my involvement.

I know that there are other solutions in this realm. Gmail is one that others are using right now. They are the main competitor. 

People are still have the view that not many of these run through Microsoft project. A lot of these will be running through Agile, so that's the basic difference I've seen in terms of the competitions in my projects.

I think this solution is a more scalable, so people now will start believing that Microsoft can also be used. The comfort of using Microsoft products, which is likely for most of the clients, is that they use Microsoft Office as their primary word processing or data processing tool. I think people have their trust in the Microsoft product line, so I think it's good to give them something because I think it's easier for them to adopt and implement.

We use it for managing our internal projects, for tracking the status and progress of our projects in terms of schedules - that they are delivered on time - and that the expenditure is controlled.

We are able to know what we are doing, how much we have spent, how much time we've taken, and it tells us how much money is left for the project. It also tells us whether we are below or above our expenditures, whether we are below or above our budget.

The graphical scheduling feature is very important for us.

It has to be more user-friendly. For instance, there should be some assistance, like when you go to certain sites, people pop up and say, "Can we help you? What are you looking for?" It's not interactive enough.

The stability is fine for our purposes.

Because our projects are medium size, it's capable of dealing with the details that we require. It's able to capture the critical details that we require at every stage.

Setting up is not that difficult.

It's a good solution but it does have limitations, as I said: The real-time interactions with the user are absent. That is the only issue that I would mention. Otherwise, I would recommend it.

The most important criteria when selecting a vendor are that the product has to meet the budget. It has to be something we are able to afford and also it should address our specific needs.

I would rate it at seven out of 10 because it meets most of our requirements. And judging from the stakeholder's response, they are pretty happy with what we have been giving them as presentations.

It performs very well. It's something I'm very familiar with. We use it for project management of hardware and software projects.

Traditionally, Microsoft Project has only been stand-alone, and we've never used it on a Web basis. Now we use it on a Web basis. It's been absolutely great in that sense, of being collaborative and also for resource-leveling, so that people can see at an instant just where everything is. 

The key things are

• managing interactions
• resource allocation
• resource-leveling, enterprise 

and as a collaborative tool, because we use it across multiple projects at a time.

I think they need more flexibility with licensing, because there are preconceived ideas that don't allow as much flexibility with the various licenses.

Stability is quite good. The only issue I have had in the past is if our internet connection is pretty slow, but that can happen for any package. Other than that, it's fairly good.

Very good. We haven't reached the limit yet, and we're using multiple projects across many sites. So it seems to scale quite well.

We are on online support, but we don't use it that often. We used it on two occasions, mainly to assist in setting up particular scenarios or to trace a bug or problem with the Web server.

The support was good and we have a direct connection with our support service.

We've always used Project to some extent, but it was more stand-alone rather than enterprise. Now we're on an enterprise scheme, it's much more helpful because we've got a global 3D view of projects.

There are several criteria I look for when selecting a vendor:

• ease of use
• expandability
• resource-leveling
• cost of ownership, obviously
• support needed.

They're the key things.

Very simple. I was reasonably familiar with Project in the first instance, but because we're using it online, Web-based, rather than an on-prem, it was minimal setup from our point of view.

Smartsheet, I think we looked at that. We looked at JIRA in the early phase, but that wasn't portfolio. It was just the normal JIRA bug tracking. We do use that in the company, but not for project management necessarily, more just task tracking.

Research it thoroughly and try to match benefits, rather than just buying features.

It just works. Although, EPM 2010 UI seems a bit dated now that 2016 is available.

A single place for all our organisation's project records.

Deliverables List: Most useful to enable meaningful status reporting at an enterprise level. It enables a minimum viable reporting level for "accidental" project leads who are unfamiliar with scheduling techniques.

The new versions appear to address the current UX and an ability to better represent the application of agile management methodologies.

• Demand workflow
• Resource management
• SharePoint site integration

Project management.

Permission management needs improvement.

More than nine years.

No issues.

No issues.

No issues.

A seven out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

No.

From my point of view, there are many features that are valuable for portfolio management, such as linking between company strategy and each project, resource management, overview of portfolio projects and their separate parameters for resources, budgeting and forecasting perspectives.

I also mostly use resource allocation and resource assignments to see an overview of separate resources and specific project allocation.

After implementing this product, the biggest improvement was with timesheet compliance with company rules, because resources had to write their allocation and time spent on each project, along with tasks across many projects. In addition, resources also had to fill in their non-project time such as administration and vacation. When they submitted their final timesheet, project managers of separate projects had to approve the specific time spent on their project and team leads approved the non-project time. After implementing this product, all project schedules were automatically actualized. This kind of automation was really helpful.

Another improvement was related to project portfolios and the initial decision regarding which new project to start at the moment and which projects should be postponed or canceled for strategic reasons.

There is definitely room for improvement with the algorithms that are used for resource allocation. There should be options for using generic algorithms or multi-objective generic algorithms with more inputs from the resource and the HR department. This should really improve the way resources are allocated to separate project tasks. At the moment, there are parameters such as resource allocation, personal calendar and availability of resource. Also the role or added primary skill of resource, but nothing else.

I used this product at my previous two jobs/companies, and I also have been implementing this product since version 2007 to different customers for almost six years, together with configuration, integration and training.

There are no issues with deployment when the implementation company realizes what the deployment needs as prerequisites and which steps need to be done during the process. There are also many best practices, as well. Of course, they should take into consideration many issues related to security, to database maintenance and to resources, as well.

I also had some issues with patch management, where clients have different versions of operating systems, Microsoft Office, Project Professional, etc. There needs to be some rules and policies, as in every other information system implementation.

I have not encountered any stability issues. I always had patch management policies and all the issues were with SharePoint Server Platform or with Project Server Queue, but this weren’t stability issues. J

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Well, the Project Server product isn’t often installed to be honest and there aren’t many people with deep-dive knowledge, so many times we use Google searches for troubleshooting.

I did not previously use a different solution. Some customers use Excel to drive projects, some of them use Primavera or some cloud-based products like Trilio, etc.

Initial setup was complex from the point of view of the complete implementation. Setup of the product from the installation point of view was simple, because it is only an add-on for SharePoint Server. In SharePoint Server 2016, Project Server is only a new service, which can be turned on or off.

I work for a reseller as the Head of the Microsoft Department and as the Principal Architect. The level of expertise on my team is good J

If there processes already exist in the company, let’s say 1-1.5 year ROI; otherwise, about three years.

Well, for the on-premise version, there are only CAL licences, not any other types, so you only need to buy a Project Server licence and then CAL licences for access. Important and often problematic are licences for SQL Server, or Windows Server (the domain controller is important).

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.

• Ease of use.
• Adaptability.
• Stability.

• The centralization of all projects baselines in Project Server gave us control over the process. Additionally, we unified the information into just one source to report indicators, progress, milestones, and much more.
• Microsoft Project Server gave us an easy way to list and classify our projects, creating great views for a high quantity of information with the Project Web Application.
• We can now define our own project indicators and performance KPI’s, according to our project process. During the last 4 years we have used Project Server to save more than 400 baselines.

I think that "earned value calculation" could be improved, and also the relationship between time and cost, that sometimes does not allow adjustments during execution.

I have used this for 10 years.

I did not ecnounter any stability issues.

There were no scalability issues. We have more than 400 projects on our Project Server database, and everything works fine.

Technical support was adequate.

We did not use any previous solution.

Initial setup was hard work, but I wasn't involved.

Scope your needs carefully, in order to get exactly what you want.

We did not evaluate alternatives.

I wasn’t involved during implementation.

The project management, scheduling and resource management features are most valuable to us.

It has improved the structured PMO process and implementation in our organization.

The stability and performance in enterprise-grade farm implementations needs to be improved.

I have been using the current version for the last four months. The old versions I have used for around six years, i.e., 2010 and 2013.

There are issues with bugs and things break, when the scale is increased.

We encountered scalability issues, i.e., the features were breaking.

I would give the technical support a 8/10 rating.

Previously, we were using a different technology.

The setup process requires technical operations.

You should buy as much as is necessary.

We did not evaluate other options but we have used other similar tools.

Planning and expertise is required.