We performed a comparison between Microsoft .NET Framework and Oracle WebCenter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Microsoft .NET Framework is debugging."
"The most valuable features are the Domain Controller and the WBFS Manager."
"It's easy to create and integrate things."
"The most valuable feature is the financial accounting."
"Microsoft .NET Framework reduces the cost of entry and enables the development of applications with mature and enterprise features, thereby lowering the entry barriers."
"Basically, .NET is simply is the easiest programming language to use, based on my experience."
"Microsoft .NET Framework’s most valuable features are web application development, RESTful services development, security, performance, and less memory footprint."
"It is a stable solution."
"A great solution for storing and searching large volumes of documents with easy access."
"Oracle integrates well with other products to cover Big Data."
"WebCenter's interface is very user-friendly."
"It's a very scalable solution and the performance is pretty good. The scalability, in my opinion, is the biggest advantage."
"The WebCenter Content is its most valuable feature. After we update a document in WebCenter Content, it can be update automatically in our intranet."
"You can move workloads in between sub-servers so that you don't overload a portion of the server."
"Integration within the solution is very good."
"The pricing is a bit expensive."
"The product’s reliability needs improvement."
"In the next release, I am looking for more advanced technologies such as socket communication and enhanced features like realtime chat with the clients."
"Lacking in auto-scaling."
"They should have more training materials available that are specific to .NET. We spend a lot of money training our engineers."
"The cloud features must be improved."
"In my opinion, this solution can be improved by providing out-of-the-box support for different types of libraries."
"You need to have the technical expertise to use this product."
"The speed of the backup should be enhanced."
"I would like them to add more Web 2.0 features."
"The solution should be offered in Persian. Right now, our version is in English, and there's a bit of a language barrier between the users and the product."
"Its functions need more stability."
"There are many document management systems that offer pretty much the same functionalities but at a lower price. The product as such is pretty good. However, the pricing is not comparable. They need to adjust their pricing to be more competitive on the market."
"WebCenter requires a lot of design effort to upload content to our regular system."
"Does not seem to be totally compatible with Windows 10 as of our current version."
"This solution needs to support translation into the Arabic language."
Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews while Oracle WebCenter is ranked 21st in Customer Experience Management with 12 reviews. Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4, while Oracle WebCenter is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle WebCenter writes "Gives me easy access, connection and compatibility with all of the Oracle products". Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and Apache Web Server, whereas Oracle WebCenter is most compared with Oracle Content Management, SharePoint, Adobe Experience Manager and WebLogic Suite. See our Microsoft .NET Framework vs. Oracle WebCenter report.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.
