We performed a comparison between Appian and Tungsten TotalAgility based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."The tool is very flexible."
"Appian has many valuable features, the first being the ease of development—rapid development. Second, the process of learning the product and tool is faster when compared to its peers in the market. It's closer to low-code, and while it's still not very easy, it's more low-code than other products in the industry. Appian has a good user interface, a seamless model user interface, which comes without additional coding. It can also integrate with multiple systems."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"The setup is easy."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"The tech support is quite good."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"What I find most valuable in Kofax TotalAgility is its OCR feature. I also find its workflow and business process management capabilities valuable. Kofax TotalAgility also has good integration with other solutions and has an API call feature."
"It's a growing tool that offers a complete package of BPM, case management, and capture capabilities."
"Data extraction and auto-classification are great features."
"Kofax TotalAgility is stable."
"The tool is low code which saves you from a developer."
"Essentially, Kofax TotalAgility as a whole is quite nice. As of now, we've only been able to use and explore its document classification and extraction capabilities. We haven't explored and used the case management capability yet, but the scan and capture capabilities we've been using heavily and those are quite good. Our solutions are mainly around those areas of Kofax TotalAgility. We haven't explored the product a lot, but the capabilities we've explored are good."
"Now it has an OCR, optical character recognition, engine where it can extract data from the document."
"It is user-friendly and has good documentation. It's good for developing communication and has a lot of the APIs needed for this purpose. There aren't a lot of software options available from this time period; this is the only one from 2013 that has this concept of microservices."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization."
"Kofax TotalAgility could improve the OTR engine. The page OTR engine is not accurate in predicting the data properly. If you provide many features which are good for business process management without an accurate OTR engine people will not want it."
"Kofax should improve its handwritten extractions."
"The one thing I would like to see more of right now: is a simplified form creation. That would be the most significant improvement I would like to see in their product."
"They provide sufficient but not excellent technical support. Perhaps there is a point where they could use some improvement."
"Lacks sufficient inbuilt features."
"Table line item extraction is not possible through Quick Capture."
"The product's console version is old. It should also improve its forum."
"Kofax TotalAgility is quite vast and complex as a product. We came from Kofax Capture and Kofax Transformation, then we started learning Kofax TotalAgility, so there are a lot of things that were quite straightforward in the Kofax Capture and Kofax Transformation cross-motion modules, but to do those in Kofax TotalAgility was a bit more complex or quite long-winded and could be improved. In the next release of Kofax TotalAgility, it would be good to have a straightforward low-code or no-code process because there were instances we struggled with having to put logic into a script or a .NET script, then calling that script, instead of the process being low-code, no-code."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while Tungsten TotalAgility is ranked 4th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 22 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Tungsten TotalAgility is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tungsten TotalAgility writes "Great with recognition and provides a high level of confidence in terms of extraction capabilities". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Tungsten TotalAgility is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, OpenText Intelligent Capture, UiPath Document Understanding, Hyland Brainware and Camunda.
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.