DocuShare vs IBM FileNet comparison

"The software development kit can be customized."

"It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."

"​Streamlined our business processes."

"The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow."

"Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues."

"One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily."

"The beauty is the response time. It is very good nowadays within the platform."

"​It is very stable and reliable."

"It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage."

"The user interface could be improved."

"It is ability to display legacy content needs improvement."

"What I would like to see is more integration."

"The basic and fundamental point about FileNet is that the interface is very bad. It's just not appealing so people are reluctant to use it."

"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."

"However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design. It depends on how many applications are connecting to FileNet. It can take a long time, depending on the application count."

"The application's processing engineer needs to be more advanced."

"It was complex. There were a lot of dependencies depending on the product. It had to be compatible with the Windows matching."

"If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis."

"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."

"We use extraction. Therefore, we can see 80 to 85 percent accuracy on data extraction. This reduces the manual indexing part, which is definitely a gain on performance efficiency."

"For the medium scale or large scale, I would recommend FileNet. FileNet is free of licensing expenses, thus good for the money. It is not expensive, but worth for the money, especially for medium scale and large scale industries."

"When it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia."

"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."

"The physical space that we have gained back pays for the service. Therefore, it has reduced our operating costs overall. We have definitely seen ROI. I would estimate $30,000 a year."

"The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do."

"For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose."