We performed a comparison between IBM ECM, IBM FileNet, and OpenText Content Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."The vertical scalability, as we can use it across some of our applications."
"The scalability is a valuable feature, that we're able to display our documents to so many people."
"The tool is a very stable solution with high availability and no information leakage. It has built-in API integration on-site. You can integrate with other components and applications like SAP, Microsoft, Oracle, etc."
"The content management is all about you as you can make the same content for minimal purpose solutions applications."
"There aren't very many ECM solutions that scale properly, both up and out. We have customers who hold billions of documents. There aren't very many that can scale that far, and that can also scale out so that they can handle lots of users, lots of documents, and that understand how to handle external users. FileNet is one that can."
"It also helps with compliance and governance issues because it's a datastore that is not modifiable, and you can guarantee that. You cannot guarantee that with a folder-based file structure, where multiple people have access."
"The natural interpolatability with IBM Datacap, that is a key component of our solution, as well as with BPM, and WebSphere Portal. That's why we prefer FileNet instead of some other, less world-class solution."
"I like the security and also the configuration. It is easy to configure and most of our business use cases have everything just with the configuration itself."
"The usability is very good. We like the Content Navigator. It's very easy to use the search and retrieve for documents and has a lot of options for the user to download documents or send an email."
"The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions."
"For a large company, for the robustness, stability, performance, and the growth — that you can grow it within seconds — I would advise using FileNet, without any doubt."
"It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"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."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"I would like to see seamless application integration."
"I would recommend not going with ECM 8 and going with FileNet instead. It seems like that is the future of the lower-volume repository. It seems like they are moving away from ECM 8.5 so I think we're going to have some challenges coming up, getting off of that technology."
"I think it's already getting away from Java applets. A lot of our users struggle with keeping up to date with Java versioning, so a lot of the functions they're doing, like printing, emailing, and even some of the viewing, they're struggling with."
"The development platform is not local. For example, you need 100 days in IBM, whereas other platforms, like ServiceNow, need only 20 days."
"It would be nice to have additional integration features, which could be integration with IoOT-based products and solutions that also have automation requirements on the IOT side. Anything can be integrated from a Gateway or API perspective would be a plus."
"One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture."
"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."
"There is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex."
"It needs better collaboration between the IBM teams on the FileNet and CCM sides."
"The application's processing engineer needs to be more advanced."
"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."
"I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers."
"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."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
