We performed a comparison between Bizagi and Bonita based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Agility is most valuable because we can develop so much faster than other tools. We can make requirements, develop, and go out to production much faster. So, agility in the software cycle is most valuable."
"With the appropriate governance framework, properly trained business analysts can be empowered to design and build business solutions themselves."
"Very, very stable."
"The natural notation is the best feature of Bizagi because it makes it compatible with other products."
"The initial setup is super simple."
"The interface, design, and accessible user manuals to help get started using the solution are valuable features in Bizagi."
"I find Bizagi so user friendly. I also think that its modeling abilities are great and it's easy to teach them to new users."
"This solution is easy to use and it is a good tool for process modeling."
"Process automation with Bonita BPM is really easy."
"The solution is stable. Even the older versions are stable."
"One of the most valuable features is you can create without coding, it is a low code platform."
"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."
"Flexible and drag-and-drop type of UI is very valuable. The integrations are also very good. You can build workflows very quickly, which is my favorite activity. By using the GUI, you can build the entire mechanism, notifications, and all this kind of stuff."
"Development of forms and flows."
"It is a great product that is powerful in developing applications."
"It should provide the ability to create a simple application. It can be used for database modeling diagrams and forms, but it should also support CRUD, that is, create, read, update and delete."
"The solution's interface could be a bit more user-friendly and I would like to see more integrations with other Office products, not just Office 365."
"The solution needs to make it easier to use RPA products on it. They may need an RPA specific interface. It would be better than having to make an RPA tool to use for viewing. Most of our work is about making RPA tools with the Bizagi, not using Bizagi itself."
"The product used to have a simulation feature, which I had used quite often. However, it's since been discontinued. It might have originally been a paid feature. It would be nice if they could bring it back and offer it for free."
"We have migrated to the cloud, but there are a lot of issues while integrating with the cloud. There are a lot of things to improve with the cloud and reporting. We were previously working with on-premise solutions, and we had access to a lot of things, but with the cloud, they changed a lot of functionalities. Some of the things we know, but with some of the things, we are having difficulties."
"I would like to see a facility for building a simple CRUD application. In Bizagi, you can use database modeling, diagrams, forms, etc., but in some circumstances I need CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) functionalities which are not there yet."
"It works slowly on the cloud, sometimes."
"One part of the university has changed its regular desktops to Linux. This is a weak point because Bizagi doesn't run on Linux. I would like the opportunity to run the software inside of Linux."
"It would be nice to have a wizard to help walk through the development process and create a backbone."
"Bonita must add a rule engine. We are a 360-degree partner of Bonita. We can integrate with any kind of rule engine. We have a dashboard related to engine performance, but getting a configurable dashboard for the Buildium or transactional data will add value."
"There is a need for more components in the library and additional customization options for these components."
"We are struggling a bit with integrations."
"It is missing some important features that other products have."
"The main issue with Bonita is that the workspace crashes sometimes."
"I have run into a lot of problems because there is not enough documentation."
"There is a considerable learning curve."
Bizagi is ranked 5th in Business Process Design with 78 reviews while Bonita is ranked 11th in Business Process Design with 27 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while Bonita is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Bonita writes "A simple and lightweight college course automation system with third-party integrations". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Microsoft Power Apps, ARIS BPA and Appian, whereas Bonita is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Apache Airflow, ProcessMaker and ARIS BPA. See our Bizagi vs. Bonita report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors, best Process Automation vendors, and best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.
Esperaba algo mas de este estilo, sin embargo desarrollé esta tabla de comparación de Suites BPM, la cuál no puedo anexar por lo que dejo en formato de texto en caso deque alguien requiera este conocimiento.
Esta tabla fue desarrollada basandome en textos acádemicos de fuentes confiables. Sin embargo no pude encontrar el numero aproximado de clientes que usan ARIS, por lo que si alguien cuenta con esta información se lo agradecería mucho, ya que es el último dato que requiero para completar esta tabla comparativa.
BizAgi Suite, Bonita BPM, IBM Suite, ARIS + Webmethods, AuraPortal, Oracle Suite, Appian eBPM HOPEX
Requiere pago Software licenciado (anual o perpetuo), freeware en versiones académicas Versión pagada (licenciamiento anual) y versión gratuita Software licenciado Software licenciado Software licenciado Versión pagada y versión gratuita Software licenciado Versión pagada y versión gratuita
Código abierto No Si (GPL) No No No No No No
Diseño intuitivo Bastante Intuitivo Bastante Intuitivo Medianamente intuitivo Bastante Intuitivo Bastante Intuitivo Requiere tiempo de adaptación Medianamente intuitivo Bastante Intuitivo
Acceso a licencia de prueba. Si No No Si Si No Si Si
Tutoriales y Soporte técnico Si Si Si Si Si Si Si Si
Notación para diagramar BPMN 2.0 BPMN 2.0 BPMN 2.0, BPEL BPMN 2.0, EPC BPMN 2.0 BPMN 2.0, BPEL BPMN 2.0, EPC BPMN 2.0
Compatibilidad con base de datos SQL Server, Oracle, MySQL SQL Server, PostgreSQL, MySQL, Oracle, HSQL SQL Server SQL Server, Oracle SQL Server Oracle SQL Server, Oracle, MySQL SQL Server, Oracle
Sistema operativo Windows, Linux Multi-plataforma Multi-plataforma Windows, Linux, Mac Windows Multi-plataforma Windows, Linux, Solaris Windows
Monitoreo en tiempo real Si Si Si No Si Si Si Regular
Servicio en la nube Si Si Si Si Si Si Si Si
Requiere programación No No Poco Poco No Si Poco No
Número de clientes >500 >1000 >3500 >800 >2000 >2000 >2700
Principales clientes Adidas Group, BBVA, Telefónica, BNP Paribas Xerox, Stanford University, CSC Barclays, Emericon, Banca popolare di Milano, Saperion Fujitsu, Coca Cola, Electrolux, ING, Credit Suisse Toyota, RSA Chile, Coprusa Group, Refinery of the Pacific REDISA, Panduit, Total E&P Indonesie Amazon, M&T Bank, Nissan, Ford, Baxter Credit Union GNP, P&G, EuroControl, British American Tobacco
Permite importar/exportar archivos BPMN Si Si Si Si Si Solo importación Si Si
Nivel de documentación Medio Alto Medio Alto Alto Medio Bajo Alto
Considera reglas de Negocio Si Si No Si Si No Si Si
Validación de Modelo (diagramas) Si Si Si Si No Si Si
Permite simulación Si Si Si Si Si Si Si No
Requiere conocimiento del producto Poco Poco Normal Poco Poco Normal Normal Poco
Año primera versión lanzada 1989 2001 1998 2009 2001 1997 1999 1994
Accesibilidad móvil Si Si Si Si Si Si Si No
Nivel de seguridad Regular Regular Regular Alto Alto Alto
Facilidad de instalación Sencilla Sencilla Sencilla Sencilla Sencilla Media Sencilla Media
Versión en español SI Si Si No Si Si No Si
Saludos.