We performed a comparison between ADONIS and Bonita 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."It is a stable solution."
"It's a very complete solution."
"It's easy to handle the solution thanks to being drag and drop"
"It seems that the process mapping and modeling features are well and thoroughly covered."
"We haven't ever needed to take service breaks and we can scale it throughout our company without any problem."
"The best features of the system include good analytics for business processes including the calculation of time and cost."
"The product is useful for designing business processes and for repositories."
"This product is very easy-to-use and user-friendly."
"The solution is stable. Even the older versions are stable."
"The user interface is easy to use."
"We use the tool to validate and give access to the users. It is for access management."
"Its user-friendliness, along with the availability of comprehensive and clear documentation on the website is the most valuable."
"The user interface is better than all of the open-source BPMs that I have tried."
"I find process management and user interface designing the most valuable features."
"Process automation with Bonita BPM is really easy."
"There is a function to check if the model BPMN is being used correctly, but the report from the check is not always very clear."
"This solution would be improved if 24/7 support were available."
"When you update a page, the information on the quick links sidebar on the left side doesn't stay in the same place. It moves down, so you have to scroll to find it. That's not very user-friendly."
"The solution is in English and we have added certain parts in Russian as this is easier for our students. It would be useful to have the system in Russian."
"We have to use a different solution to automate our business processes."
"Rearranging things to get information from the objects and the model together to get a report out of them could be done better."
"If there's no WiFi connection, you can't access ADONIS."
"The community edition has limited module functionality. If they could release some of the functionality that's available in the enterprise edition that would be helpful to those learning to use the solution."
"There is a considerable learning curve."
"I have run into a lot of problems because there is not enough documentation."
"The main issue with Bonita is that the workspace crashes sometimes."
"Bonita can improve by offering more flexibility. The developer does not receive the code of the application to modify it. Most of the other solutions I have used allow the developers to change or improve the code that is generated."
"It is missing some important features that other products have."
"There could be an improvement in IoT connectivity."
"It would be nice to have a wizard to help walk through the development process and create a backbone."
ADONIS is ranked 17th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 7 reviews while Bonita is ranked 11th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 27 reviews. ADONIS is rated 7.8, while Bonita is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ADONIS writes "A strong choice for business process modeling with an easy-to-use drag and drop approach". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Bonita writes "A simple and lightweight college course automation system with third-party integrations". ADONIS is most compared with ARIS BPA, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Camunda, Bizagi and IBM BPM, whereas Bonita is most compared with Camunda, Bizagi, Apache Airflow, IBM BPM and ProcessMaker. See our ADONIS vs. Bonita 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.