We performed a comparison between Apache Airflow and OpenText ProVision based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool is user-friendly."
"One of its most valuable features is the graphical user interface, providing a visual representation of the pipeline status, successes, failures, and informative developer messages."
"It's stable."
"Apache Airflow is easy to use and can monitor task execution easily. For instance, when performing setup tasks, you can conveniently view the logs without delving into the job details."
"We have been quite satisfied with the stability of the solution."
"The best feature is the customization."
"Since Apache works very well on Python, we can manage everything and create pipelines there."
"Development on Apache Airflow is really fast, and it's easy to use with the newer updates. Everything is in Python, so it's not hard to understand. They also have a graphical view, so if you are not a programmer and you are just an administrator, you can easily track everything and see if everything is working or not."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"I would like to see it more friendly for other use cases."
"One specific feature that is missing from Airflow is that the steps of your workflow are not pipelined, meaning the stageless steps of any workflow. Not every workflow can be implemented within Airflow."
"The automation capabilities could be improved; a visual workflow designer and a graphical tool to reduce coding would be very helpful. But for now, it's sufficient for our simple workflows."
"We're currently using version 1.10, but I understand that there's a lot of improvements in version 2. In the earlier version that we're using, we sometimes have problems with maintenance complexity. Actually using Airflow is okay, but maintaining it has been difficult."
"Apache Airflow could be improved by integrating some versioning principles."
"Enhancements become necessary when scaling it up from a few thousand workflows to a more extensive scale of five thousand or ten thousand workflows."
"For admins, there should be improved logging capabilities because Apache Airflow does have logging, but it's limited to some database data."
"The platform's stability needs improvement, particularly regarding occasional interruptions due to networking issues."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
Apache Airflow is ranked 2nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 31 reviews while OpenText ProVision is ranked 35th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. Apache Airflow is rated 8.0, while OpenText ProVision is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of Apache Airflow writes "Enable seamless integration with various connectivity and integrated services, including BigQuery and Python operators ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ProVision writes "Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration". Apache Airflow is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Informatica Cloud API and App Integration, IBM Business Automation Workflow and AWS Step Functions, whereas OpenText ProVision is most compared with ARIS BPA, Visio, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and SAP Signavio Process Manager. See our Apache Airflow vs. OpenText ProVision report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.