We performed a comparison between OpenText Content Manager and SharePoint 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."It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"It offers ease of use, which is crucial."
"The metadata services, the WCF service integration and the Voxel feature are three most valuable elements of this solution."
"Its most valuable feature is the document library."
"It has an easy to distribute administration capability, and can also scale to meet a large number of future needs."
"For SharePoint, I believe the most valuable feature is the customization and allowing you to share and edit files and documents. Being able to share externally and the precise administration of the files in terms of giving permissions and controlling who has access to what is a very good feature."
"I do like the collaboration around documents. The versioning history has proven useful in some instances as well."
"There is not just one valuable feature; it is all of them working together."
"The access control is definitely a good feature. We also appreciate the improvements they've made to the online applications, where multiple users can work on the same documents simultaneously. Everything syncs automatically."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"There's a challenge with desktop applications synchronizing with online documents in real-time. If someone is working on a document in the desktop version of Excel, for example, and someone else is editing the same document online, the changes won't sync immediately. That's the only real challenge we've encountered."
"The management of the product/back-end is complex."
"Document management and the ability to easily integrate single sign-on (SSO) are areas for improvement in SharePoint."
"When you are trying to migrate from a different platform to SharePoint for file storage, the upload utility should be more flexible, taking more files and then updating you on the upload status of the files you are trying to transfer into SharePoint."
"This solution would benefit from the implementation of enhanced online forms and template development capabilities."
"The way to change the version of the files in SharePoint should be improved. The method of synchronizing files from local to the cloud can also use improvement."
"The areas of this solution that need improvement are the relationships between lists, cross-site web parts, and page-building tools."
"During uptime under our network, it is hard to find info when content is hefty."
OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 150 reviews. OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". OpenText Content Manager is most compared with OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet, Microsoft Purview Records Management and Box, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox and WordPress. See our OpenText Content Manager vs. SharePoint report.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management 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.
What are the records management requirements that you are using to vet and determine the best capability?
Should there be requirements to maintain temporary and/or permanent records?
Not if you are managing physical records in CM. You would need an add-in for M365 such as AvePoint Cloud Records or RecordPoint Records365.
Both help another important issue - M365 Compliance and SharePoint Online are complex user interfaces.
In a lot of organizations, records management staff don't have direct access to RM functions, with IT doing the administration based on service requests from IM. Both add-ins hand usability and RM functions back to the IM team.