I want to bump this thread. My organization is evaluating EPM '07 but a
stakeholder asked me to investigate Mercury too. Has anyone out there done a
comparison of the two? even just a high-level? I am certified in EPM but am
out of the loop on Mercury. My worry is that it's not nearly as strong as EPM
'07, nor does it integrate as well into the Microsoft famliy as EPM (how
could it?). Is anyone has done a qualitative comparison out there I'd love to
hear from them.
Hi Brian,
I've not done a detailed comparison but here are some observations:
- I think the organizational maturity must be a lot higher to make
Mercury work.
- The Mercury scheduling tool is completely web-based. You have to
click a million times more in Mercury than in EPM. I'm afraid MS will
also want to move to web-based scheduling, but for now, let's be
grateful for the MSP client.
- The Mercury tool is part of a complete enterprise suite (service
management, application management, financial management, etc.). They
will try to push this on you whenever they can (and trust me, they can
play you like an old piano in a Texas whor.. eh, saloon). EPM is
definitely a better deal for your money.
- There is some integration with the MS platform, e.g. exports to
Excel. You can also synchronize Mercury with EPM, but I haven't seen
this work.
- Mercury has very pretty pictures and dashboards. I think that's what
often prods managers to go-ahead on many (if not most) multi-million
dollar Mercury implementations.
In the end, I don't think it matters much which tool you choose, as
long as your processes are in place. If your organization practices
best in class project management processes and has deep pockets,
Mercury might be a good option for you.
