3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 28, 2016
Once we got correct resources, everything ran smooth. But until then there were hurdles and issues.
Right technical resource was biggest takeaway from this niche upgrade implmentation.
Starting trouble, but very smooth once up and running.
Steep curve in the beginning.
Better resource quality on their side.
Make sure resources are top notch and tighter control on vendor management.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 16, 2016
There is not a lot of 3rd party Datacap experience in the market, which sometimes causes us to rely on IBM for services. There services have been great, but they can be expensive and it takes multiple iterations to bring them down on pricing. For this particular upgrade, we primarily used their support services when we ran into issues with the upgrade. Some issues remained opened for an extended period of time even though they were Sev. 1 tickets. Required us to open a critical situation with them in order to get any movement. I would give them a 3 with overall experience sometimes, but they have been a decent partner and will take care of issues if you escalate them through the proper channels, even though we shouldn't have to do this.
This application is very difficult to run automated tests against. If this is a big issue for your organization, you may want to look at a different tool.
The flexibility of the application has been great for us. We like to customize many of our applications, right or wrong, and this tool has given us the flexibility we needed. In fact, we have added UI features that they should have in the tool and made our job a lot easier. IBM has been interested in these features and is thinking of folding them into future versions.
There architecture was one area they needed improvement on, specifically around load balancing and performance. The Task Master server sorely needs additional capabilities, which they did improve in version 9, but we used an F5 to fill this capability gap. Also, the OCR step with them takes a really long time. Again, this was improved in version 9, but they could probably use some further improvement here.
Wish the vendor would provide more prescriptive guidance in automating the deployments of this application. IBM initially told us we couldn't automate the deployments, but we used a combination of Octopus and Team City to automate the build and deployment of the application. This automation is critical for us and I would assume other customers would be interested in this as well. Having this guidance published by them would be really helpful. Related to what I mentioned above, it would be great if they could publish guidance on how to automate the testing as well.
We would have dedicated more time towards testing. There were five product issues discovered in testing and they remained open with IBM for a fairly long time. Having the additional testing time would have accounted for these product issues and would have prevented the rush towards the end in meeting our delivery date.
Based on my earlier comments, it shouldn't take weeks to resolve a Sev. 1 issue. Sometimes we would have no one response from them for days, even though they should have been providing a response daily. The only reason they don't get a lower score is that once we escalated the situation they resolved the issue quickly.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 28, 2016
Continued support for the vendor’s ODWEK component would have been appreciated.
Consider more vendors.
Easy to ingest.
Can’t change after ingestion.
Provide ongoing support for components.
Consider more vendors before choosing the product.