Platform comparison
OpenLM Platform vs Open iT LicenseAnalyzer
Internal draft for web team review · legal/counsel sign-off recommended before publishing · no pricing or TCO claims included per internal decision
Infrastructure footprint
One tenth of the footprint. Open iT's architecture is built on a 2005-era BI stack — OLAP cubes and SQL Server Reporting Services. OpenLM runs as a modern, single-service application.
Sources: Open iT published deployment/sizing documentation; OpenLM system requirements.
The complaint we hear: "Why does OpenLM need so much infrastructure?"
Here's what each platform actually requires, based on published deployment and sizing documentation.
| Requirement | Open iT | OpenLM |
|---|---|---|
| Servers required | 3 (Core/Analysis + SQL DB Engine + SQL SSAS/SSRS) | 1 |
| CPU cores | 16+ | 4 |
| RAM | 160 GB | 16 GB |
| Disk | ~3 TB across multiple volumes | ~0.1–0.2 TB |
| Operating system | Windows Server only | Windows or Linux |
| Web / auth layer | IIS + Kerberos SPN + domain service account | Built-in — nothing additional required |
What the infrastructure actually costs
Requirements like these carry real software costs that don't show up in a product quote. Based on Open iT's own deployment documentation:
| Component | Open iT | OpenLM |
|---|---|---|
| SQL Server Standard Edition | Required — Express not supported | MySQL/MariaDB (free) or your existing MS SQL |
| SQL Server Analysis Services (OLAP) | Required | Not needed |
| SQL Server Reporting Services | Required for all report templates | Not needed — reporting is built in |
| Windows Server licenses | 3 | $0 on Linux |
| Ongoing operations | Three Windows servers to patch, back up, and secure | One small VM — or none on our SaaS |
Functionality, side by side
| Capability | Open iT | OpenLM |
|---|---|---|
| License manager support | Named list of supported managers | 90+ license managers |
| Applications supported | 6,000+ | 25,000+ engineering and industrial applications |
| Real-time monitoring | Polling-based, ~5-minute refresh | True real-time |
| Denial reporting (true vs. false denials) | Yes | Yes |
| Denial prevention/enforcement | Not offered | License Access Control — actively prevents denials before they happen |
| Active vs. idle usage detection | Separate optimization level | Included |
| License harvesting | Separate optimization level | Included |
| Dongle / DLL monitoring | Not offered | Yes |
| Authentication (on-prem) | Windows local/domain accounts | SSO, Azure AD, SAML — on-prem or cloud |
| Alerting | Email only | Email, dashboard, ITSM integration |
| Reporting platform | Windows-only analysis server | Web UI on any platform, API access, BI integration |
| AI-assisted reporting | Not offered | Conversational reporting via MCP connector, AI-based usage insights |
| Transparent pricing (published on company website) | No — quote-only | Yes |
Cloud and deployment architecture
Open iT
Open iT's cloud offering describes a "fully managed service" hosted by their team. Based on their published SaaS materials and authentication documentation (cloud customers use Azure AD SSO; on-prem customers use local Windows accounts — a split consistent with separate infrastructure per deployment), their cloud product appears to run as dedicated, single-customer infrastructure rather than shared multi-tenant architecture.
OpenLM
OpenLM Cloud is self-service, multi-tenant SaaS: sign up, connect your license servers, and see your data — no per-customer infrastructure required.
Security & certifications
| Open iT | OpenLM | |
|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 | Not stated in public materials | Certified |
| ISO 27001 | Not stated in public materials | Certified |
Support
| Open iT | OpenLM | |
|---|---|---|
| Support hours | 24×5 | 24×6 |
| Support success rate | Not published | 98% |
Software License Management (SLM)
Explore the full unlimited version of OpenLM for 30 days. During this time you will enjoy full support with no strings attached.
Request a demo
Disclaimer: The information provided above regarding OpenLM vs Open iT is based on interviews and research with users of relevant systems as well as publicly available data on their respective websites, current as of July 2026. It is intended to offer a general comparison between the two platforms and highlight specific features. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and due diligence to make informed decisions. The accuracy and relevance of the information may vary over time, and individual user experiences may differ. The text does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation of either platform and should be used as a starting point for further investigation. Should you find any inaccuracies in this page, please let us know.