OpenText AI Operations Management Reviews

We use the on-premises version to monitor our systems and manage emails. All our systems use Operations Bridge, especially the critical systems.

It is a very complicated product. It's difficult to manage. Nowadays, products are very easy to manage, deploy, and integrate, but Operations Bridge is very complicated to manage. Maybe it is an improvement point for this product. It's not easy to integrate with Operations Bridge.

It should be plug-and-play.

It was a very stable product, but now I noticed it's not a very stable product anymore. Under its previous name, it was very stable, but since they changed it to Operations Bridge, it's not very stable. When the product is complicated, it can lead to the solution being unstable.

Our entire administrative team uses Operations Bridge. That is around 50 people at the same time. We send lots of events by email from Operations Bridge.

Their technical support is also not very good. If we open a case, because we couldn't solve the problem, the case comes back. We don't open a case just to ask a question to the support team.

The setup was very complex.

It should be easier to use this product, because once you're in production, systems are more complicated. This kind of tools should be very simple and straightforward.

I would rate this as six out of ten.

With our HPOM installation, we monitor the European (and part of the global) infrastructure of our financial services, consisting of around 800 servers in various regions.

It has greatly reduced the number and duration of outages as support teams are notified immediately when something goes wrong or even before something breaks. The integration with the ticketing tool makes sure that there is a record for every issue.

The various types of monitors are very useful. We use them all:

• Threshold monitors
• Log file monitors
• Open message templates
• SNMP trap monitors
• Process monitors
• Database and infrastructure SPIs.

Additionally, the Performance Manager provides great insight into our systems' performance.

Installing and upgrading the HPOM and Operations Agent software is not always easy and the process can be quite fragile. Once it is running, it is very quick and stable, but an upgrade can quite easily break something or terminate unexpectedly.

For additional features, we are looking forward (and implementing) OMi 10.6x.

Organizations using multiple tools for monitoring their infrastructure, namely storage, UPS, etc. rely on multiple consoles to view the events from respective elements to manage consoles. This causes delay in isolating the fault. OMi helps in the consolidation of events on a single dashboard from several sources via the available APIs.

The biggest strength of the Operations Bridge is the consolidation of events from various sources. For one customer, we were able to consolidate events from more than 25 sources, most via Traps using a BSM Connector. Once the Head of IT Operations saw the value, then the expectation was that all the other siloed departments would work together to send the events to a central console.

Event consolidation

Cross domain event correlation

Run Time Service Model (RTSM)

Flexible dashboard with the availability of widgets

Agent and agentless monitoring

The most important feature is availability of the software on Docker, hence reducing implementation & upgrade timeline

Remove the dependency of Java technology. This is a feature used for admin purposes to update the modeling.

For high stability, I would recommend a HA setup with the recommended configurations.

Single server setup should only be considered for small environment.

Micro Focus Operation Bridge is highly scalable. It can support multiple server architecture for HA, DC-DR setup, and is also available as a container for the Docker, which can be ported on private or public cloud.

The customer service response is good.

I have helped organizations to switch from other tools to OMi. The main reason was event consolidation and seamless integration with the Service Manager for incident management and SLA reporting.

The setup is straightforward. Depending of the architecture/integration, it can take from one to 10 days.

Highly recommend to go for CDF (Containerized Deployment Foundation)

I have implemented this product with the help of a team.

ROI will depend on the modules available.

E.g., if Orchestration is integrated with events, the fault can be fixed with the given sets of SOPs. This can give up to 90% ROI in a short period of time.

Pricing is very flexible and depends on the modules selected as per the requirement. You can select from the available modules Micro Focus Operation Bridge (SiteScope, Operations Agent, Reporter, Operations Analytic, Cloud Optimizer, Orchestration, CMDB, and several Management Packs for various technologies like Oracle, DB2, Citrix, etc.).

Not applicable.

Implementation of Micro Focus Operations Bridge will need a long-term perspective while solving today's problem. 

• To monitor the complete IT infrastructure. 
• To consolidate various products into one and various screen NOC were using to monitor the environments into one single screen, so they can act quickly on the issues and resolve the issue faster. 
• Correlate the events from servers, network switches, routers, and present single or few events with the help of correlation techniques stream-based event correlation and topology based event correlations to reduce number of events, so NOC can find root cause more quickly and help with the ROI. 
• Migration from Operations Manager of Linux to Operation Bridge products. 

Single pane of glass. NOC has to view only a single screen to monitor the entire infrastructure. All events can be seen on single screen and they integrate well with other products. 

Well integrated OMi with Network Node Manager (NNM), Operations Bridge Reporter (OBR), Operations Manager for Linux (OML), and Operations Connector and Universal Discovery to correlate events using SBEC event correlation. Event correlation helps to consolidate and reduce event counts, so operators can act quickly and resolve the issue in a timely manner. 

It has the capability to display overall health of the infrastructure and is very useful for executive reports on the health of the infrastructure.

It helps to integrate and consolidate various products, such as Operation Manager, Operations Bridge, OMi, Operations Bridge Reporter, Operations Connector, Network Node Manager, Universal Discovery, ServiceNow, and NOC, which use one single screen to monitor the entire infrastructure. SBEC (Stream-Based Event Correlation) event correlation has helped consolidate events into one event helping to reduce events visible to operators letting them act and find root causes more quickly. It has helped to handle message storm situations. Earlier NOC were using different screens to monitor different environments. Now, they have to look at single screen as other products are well-integrated with OMi. 

Topology base event correlation. Topology-based event correlation does not work well with NNM events. NNM does not understand well and collect information needed to correlate the events. Separate active and history tables from one single table and improve performance. It should be improved to view more than 100K events from closed browsers without impacting performance. QA of the products should be thorough before it is released and documentation lacks the information needed to implement the products, upgrade the products from one version to next version, and there is integration with other products. If events goes beyond 100,000, performance is degraded and sometimes the browser freezes.

No.

No.

Technical support is good, but it could be improved. 

No, we are migrating from OML to OMi. 

Initial setup was straightforward and integration was easy. 

In-house. 

Not applicable.

It is competitive. 

No.

The product is great, but it could be improved. 

Monitoring our hybrid infrastructure, where we have AWS, GCP, and on-premise.

Also, the container monitoring was a good point.

The preloaded rules and ways to monitor your systems are a must. We did not want to create rules for each system and software.

We are able to better identify the root cause of an incident. It also reduces the number of tickets that we have received, because there is some correlation.

Implementation could be improved. We also need training and a good partner in order to install and configure it.

No issues.

We used Nagios, but it was not able to monitor container and cloud well.

The first setup was complex. That is why we asked for a partner's help.

Setup costs can be high depending on the partner, but it is worth it.

No other options.

It allows us to build dashboards for individual parts of the business. Our team members appreciate that they can just get a view of their part of the world without having to worry about anyone else's. This seems to be the most valuable feature for us right now.

We have a central screen that alerts us to problems from all parts of the business. This enables our operations team to have visibility of all issues and deal with them or call out as required.

I know that in the next version, X1005, they're moving to more graphical overviews, which should help our senior managers. We're looking forward to that upgrade.

I think it's been seven years since we first used it.

We've had no issues with deployment.

It's been stable though we've had issues in the past. I'm not sure whether they were hardware related or OS or the product, but it seems to be quite stable in the past few years.

I haven't bumped into any issues, so it's scaling well.

I would evaluate them as weak, unfortunately. They're barely bearable in the quality of the guys that support us. There are not always specialists in their support system. They seem to be learning as much as we are. So support is weak, I'd say.

The initial setup was straightforward. I had no problems with it.

Plan your implementation. Learn what's really important to your business that's not even from an IT perspective. That's only natural production or sale side or whatever it is and use that to map it onto your implementation. That's what I would say.

The most valuable feature is the event correlation and how we handle the events. There are a lot of possibilities and it's a new experience for us. I used to work with IBM. It's another way of working and thinking and it's a revelation for us.

It helps us the most with correlations of events and events handling; how we do that in SM9, it is a new way of working for us. I'm very pleased with it.

There are a lot of locked files and I don't know always to search for the good locked file that can show us more information. There are a lot of locked files, about a thousand. You cannot always find the correct information to solve an issue.

We have worked now almost two years with OpsBridge and it is a very stable system. We hardly experience difficulties or down times. It is the most stable system I ever used.

We have almost 50,000 employees. I know that a lot of customers work with OpsBridge. They find it easy to use, and how we implement it makes it very nice for the customers. I know that the customers are satisfied.

We have a deal with HPE and we have all the tools of HPE. I think they make good tools. There is always room for improvement, but basically they always have good tools.

I have only compared HPE products that I work with and I have my experience with HPE. I have not evaluated other solutions.

The most valuable feature of Operations Bridge is the centralization of all the alerts, events, and topology-based statistics that you can see in a centralized view for different customers internally. It could be your support groups, your management, or your governance. That's what we feel like it's giving us. It is the ability to look at it holistically, even though it's pure statistics from events and notifications. Your key performance indicators can be validated very easily and centrally.

From our monitoring perspective or from a visibility perspective, HPE UCMDB is a must have. It's an amazing piece of software. Regardless what other systems you have in your environment, you should have UCMDB in place because it performs a very good classification and discovery of your CIs. This tends to build up that service model that can be utilized between any piece of software. This is a great value we are getting out of UCMDB.

Operations Bridge, as is the OMI 10, is a great piece of software. It has a lot of potential that needs more exploration and we'll be doing that. We will be engaging my competent team, because we are working with HPE very closely, even for the developmental aspects. We are providing our inputs and we are bringing that change which is required for the tool. I must say that OMI 10 has great potential. This is where our core focus is, to improve on that potential aspect.

Reporting has to be tackled a bit more. Conceptually, it is there and conceptually it is amazing, but somehow the module itself is suffering. This is one of the issues with stability. The reporting module from HPE is not a very stable module, which is OBR to be very specific.

I'm going to have a round of meetings with the product development and the management to talk about that and to have more design plans and roadmap on this.

Not all the modules are very stable, but definitely we know from our practices and operations which ones are stable. Regarding the ones that are not stable, we are constantly having engagements with HPE support, as well as HPE development, to make it more stable. There are a few unstable modules, but most of them are very stable and long running. As our environment is changing, the requirements are changing and we are adapting based on our plans.

Initially, we started with the normal support. We had a lot of hiccups. Then we had a lot of discussion with the product teams, as well as the HPE account managers. Then we went for the FlexCare support, and that actually changed the way support works with us. We were able to receive Level-2 support directly instead of going to the log procedures and wasting time over the initial assessment of the cases. Then we were able to get guys directly involved in our support issues or the cases and incidents, which actually helped us a lot.