We performed a comparison between Alfresco and Box based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Content Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Document repository."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"The sharing feature, with its various permission settings, such as viewing or uploading, is convenient and helpful."
"Simple file sharing and sync for internal and external customers."
"Box is very simple and effective, so I prefer Box."
"File sharing with collaborators not on the same domain with offline access from multiple devices: I work on many projects that are multi-organizational, such as with customers, suppliers, or acquisitions."
"Sharing and collaborating across files and folders has been a massive game changer."
"It is a very user-friendly product."
"We've never had a penetration. We've never had a security issue that their support didn't solve. We love their audit trail. We can know exactly when a collaborator opens. We love how you can define a collaborator."
"The system's performance is impressive, and file sharing is notably straightforward."
"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"I think the presentation layer could be improved - currently, it's too complex, and there are too many features cluttered all over the screen."
"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"Like all cloud platforms, there are always areas of improvement around sync to local devices."
"I don't like the low level of role-based security it provides – it's very cumbersome, and the support is ordinary at times."
"The UI should be faster. Sometimes it lags when switching between documents."
"Data privacy, regarding where to store your data: Offering several transparent(!) options (where to store my data and whether to sync back or not and where to sync) regarding the local law situations (USA, EU, Switzerland!) would increase the credibility of a US based company (after NSA ‘snooping’)."
"If there was a plugin that added some sort of toolbar in Office, that would be great."
"One thing that Box would benefit from is a records management component."
"I haven't really come across a case where we're not able to use it for what it is, so I don't really have anything holding us up or any customers holding us up at this point that I know of. There are always some limitations, but as a technologist, I just live with them, and there is always room for improvement, but I don't have anything quantifiable."
"I would love to see the ability to invite collaborators extended to a file level, not just the folder level."
Alfresco is ranked 9th in Enterprise Content Management while Box is ranked 4th in Enterprise Content Management with 39 reviews. Alfresco is rated 8.0, while Box is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Alfresco writes "Flexible and customizable but lacking integration with Microsoft". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Box writes "Allows you to upload and download files quickly but lacks integration with Office 365". Alfresco is most compared with SharePoint, Hyland OnBase, IBM FileNet, OpenText Documentum and Oracle Content Management, whereas Box is most compared with SharePoint, Microsoft OneDrive, Citrix ShareFile, Office 365 and Kiteworks. See our Alfresco vs. Box report.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors and best Document Management Software vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management 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.
