Onplana vs OnePlan

OnePlan is Power Platform tenanted, so the sequence starts before your data does: a Power Platform environment and Dataverse have to be provisioned and configured, then OnePlan is deployed into them, and only then do schedules and the resource pool come across. The practical consequence is that the timeline is usually gated by tenant readiness and admin availability rather than by your schedule files. If your Power Platform environment already exists and your admins know Dataverse, that step is short. If it does not, budget for it honestly, because it is the part teams most often underestimate. Onplana sits at the other end of that trade: you sign up, upload a .mpp, and the schedule is there, at the cost of not being natively embedded in your Power Platform estate.

Some things are genuinely platform-bound and will be rebuilt wherever you land. Custom workflows are the clearest case: they are written against Project Server or SharePoint Designer and have no portable form, so they are re-authored in Power Automate for OnePlan or in the stage-gate pipeline for Onplana. Project site content and its permission inheritance is a SharePoint concern and usually stays in SharePoint. Timephased actuals and ActualCost are technically exportable but often stale, which is why Onplana rebuilds actuals from timesheets rather than importing a figure that may never have been reconciled. Resource plans and anything that only ever existed as an OData report also need rebuilding. Knowing this list up front is worth more than any feature comparison, because it is where migration estimates actually go wrong.

Project Online retires on 30 September 2026, so the constraint is real but the evaluation itself is not the slow part. Running a genuine parallel pilot on one real .mpp will tell you more in an afternoon than a feature matrix will. The sequencing matters more than the calendar: an Onplana pilot can start immediately because the free tier needs no procurement, whereas a OnePlan pilot generally needs a sales conversation and a configured Power Platform tenant first. Start the one with the longer lead time earlier, and use the other to sanity-check it rather than waiting to run them in series.

Yes. OnePlan acquired and operates the project-online.com domain as a marketing surface positioning OnePlan as the official Project Online successor. We acknowledge that's a strong domain-capture play. It doesn't change the underlying product question, which platform actually fits your team, but it does mean you'll see OnePlan branding when searching for Project Online migration content, even if you weren't specifically evaluating them.

Not automatically. Power Platform–tenanted deployments work well when your team already has Power Platform skills in-house (Power Apps, Power Automate, Dataverse). If you don't, the implementation overhead can be larger than expected. Onplana integrates with M365 via standard SAML/OIDC SSO and Microsoft Graph for calendar/Teams integrations, different posture, lower implementation cost, less Microsoft lock-in.

OnePlan implements gates via Power Automate workflows on top of Dataverse. Onplana ships a built-in 12-stage proposal pipeline (DRAFT → SUBMITTED → ASSESSMENT → ... → COMPLETED) with designated multi-reviewer gates and quorum logic. Both are real governance. OnePlan is more configurable; Onplana is more opinionated and faster to stand up.

OnePlan is quote-based with no public pricing. Onplana publishes per-seat pricing across five tiers ($0 / $7 / $12 / $20 / $29), what you see is what you pay. For PMOs that need budget approval before starting an evaluation, that matters; for PMOs comfortable with sales-led procurement, it's a non-issue.

With Onplana, yes, sign up free, import a real .mpp, run a parallel pilot. With OnePlan, you'll typically need a sales call and a Power Platform tenant to be configured first. That's not a bug, sales-led platforms run that way for a reason, it's just a different cycle time.