We performed a comparison between GitHub CoPilot and ServiceNow based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rapid Application Development Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's most valuable feature is vulnerability management features."
"The product is easy to integrate."
"Initially, OpenAI is free, but you'll need to pay for it later."
"GitHub CoPilot has good stability and performance."
"GitHub CoPilot helps us auto-complete code. The tool's context awareness benefits our projects because it identifies the context in which we are working and automatically proposes solutions that we use."
"The initial setup of the product is easy."
"GitHub CoPilot accelerates productivity. It is an easy-to-use solution that is also helpful in saving the team's time."
"The product's initial setup is straightforward because it's pushed through the updates."
"This solution is a single-storage for our user community to submit help desk tickets."
"Your time-to-market, or TTM, becomes faster when you use ServiceNow. Even individuals that are not tech savvy can quickly change processes and workflows in it. This can make the organization as a whole more agile."
"It's great to do statuses or to review tasks."
"It allows us to filter the data, create graphs, and get detailed reports."
"It is user-friendly and simple to use."
"ServiceNow offers a range of ITSM, IT incident management, and PRCPs."
"ServiceNow provides quite good insights about what is happening in the organization."
"The look and feel is a valuable benefit for adoption."
"The solution is expensive. It should also support other programming languages."
"The tool needs to focus on integration, as it is the most important aspect. I would like to see some pre-designed modules included in my projects."
"In certain instances, OpenAI didn't respond in the expected way. The responses were more general and didn't address the specific point."
"GitHub CoPilot’s integration with other solutions could be improved."
"There's room for improvement to ensure that suggestions align more precisely with the context of what I'm seeking, minimizing instances of unrelated or inaccurate code suggestions."
"GitHub CoPilot's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"GitHub CoPilot's alerting features need improvement."
"The suggestions provided by the product must be improved."
"HR Service Management is one module that needs a lot of improvement because it's a pretty new module. It was introduced in the last two years. It's becoming more mature day by day, but there is a lot of scope for improvement in that module."
"The level of complexity and the level of discovery are the two areas that can be improved. Its UI needs to evolve. They focus a lot on cool colors and other little things, which don't bring value in terms of functionality. They need to focus less on presentation and more on the functionality within the UI. Its discovery mechanism should be improved. There is a component in ServiceNow that discovers the assets, but it doesn't do an immediate discovery, and there is a lag. If I want to open a ticket for a laptop or an asset, that asset needs to exist within ServiceNow for me to be able to say that I need to have its disk space or memory increased. It is referred to as a CI or configuration item in ServiceNow. Sometimes, ServiceNow doesn't discover these items, and as a result, I cannot open a ticket and tag that system or asset. If a system was introduced to the environment last week and it is still not listed, it becomes a problem. I will either have to wait or manually enter that system or asset. So, if I have a laptop with only 8 GB of memory and I want to request 16 GB of memory, I won't be able to do that in ServiceNow because my system or asset hasn't been discovered yet. Discovery is not immediate, and there is a lag."
"The challenge with ServiceNow lies in its expansive portfolio of services. It can be complex, and users may find it expensive and challenging to understand. There is a need for a configurator within ServiceNow that guides users on how to utilize the tool effectively. This configurator should provide insights into licensing, team requirements, and the best licensing model based on whether companies prefer ownership or consumption-based models."
"The contract module is quite rudimentary and doesn't support contract line items."
"There is room for improvement in price."
"if I consider from the IT operations management side, ServiceNow is pretty premature on some things, especially the discovery, while the other tools like Micro Focus and BMC Remedy, those that have been in the market for quite some time. ServiceNow is evolving itself in the discovery piece of the future."
"It should have more artificial intelligence for business and work capabilities. The community is not so active. There must be initiatives to make the community talk more and share more information."
"It's a little expensive compared to other tools."
GitHub CoPilot is ranked 15th in Rapid Application Development Software with 11 reviews while ServiceNow is ranked 4th in Rapid Application Development Software with 212 reviews. GitHub CoPilot is rated 8.6, while ServiceNow is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitHub CoPilot writes "Though it offers good integration features, the price needs to be lowered". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow writes "A stable and scalable solution that has excellent features and is useful for collecting data and building KPIs". GitHub CoPilot is most compared with GitLab, Oracle Application Express (APEX), Pega BPM, Mendix and OutSystems, whereas ServiceNow is most compared with BMC Helix ITSM, Microsoft Power Apps, Pega BPM, Appian and IBM Maximo. See our GitHub CoPilot vs. ServiceNow report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors.
We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
