Camunda Reviews

I mainly use the solution for learning purposes.

I primarily use the solution in order to get a clear view of my customer, including what we are doing and what processes are being made making it easy to see everything that is happening.

Overall, the solution has been very solid.

The solution is very customizable.

We're currently using the community version, which is open-source and free to use.

The solution is stable.

For the short time I have with the tool, today, I can't see something that is missing as a product and its benefits. Maybe minor things that I haven't had the opportunity to notice yet, like an easy installation using Docker or scripts where you can see the functionality quickly.

I've been using the solution for about a month or so at this point. It's still quite new to me. 

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. 

We haven't really experimented with scalability at all. We haven't used it for very long. The process we are running now does not have a large volume. Our processing is not too high today. I didn't push the framework to see how it goes with big volume data.

Currently, we have only three people that are using it in the company.

We haven't used the solution for very long and therefore haven't really had a need to reach out to technical support. As I've never been in contact with them, I can't evaluate how useful or helpful they are.

I have looked at Bonita Software a little bit, however, I haven't gotten too far in terms of studying it.

The solution's initial setup has a medium level of difficulty. It's not as easy and it's not hard. Maybe someone who is starting out and doesn't have any experience with any other framework may get into some headaches. However, I've worked with it now and for my level of expertise, it's got a medium level of difficulty to set it up.

We're testing the solution still and therefore we are using the community version right now. I wanted to take a look at the enterprise version, however, my customer would like to see more value before they agree to get into it.

We're just customers and end-users. We're currently still experimenting with the product and learning about it.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I cannot speak to the exact version number, however.

I'd advise users considering the solution to stick to the documentation and go to their GitHub to view some staples. There is a lot of good stuff in there.

So far, we have been happy with the product and its capabilities. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for invoices, receipts and purchase orders. There is no specific line of business but we basically use it for some main processes that we want to be automated.

The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part. The data model definition in Camunda is a little complicated, so for someone with industrial engineering background it would be hard. But for someone with a computer engineering programming background Camunda is much more understandable and really easy to use.

Just today I encountered a problem with the current version, and that is the functionality of the BPM standard, which is not yet implemented in Camunda. An example would be a new marker for tasks. Maybe the developers of Camunda can, as soon as possible, provide all possible functionalities of BPM standard in its process engine. Some are not yet supported and they can really cause serious problems for implementers.

In the next release I would like to have more documentation on how it can interact with other organization systems, as well as other documentation about API. I would also like more  support about features. It would be great for someone like me with a little programming and developing background, to see an easier platform for data modeling. A place where you can create your own data model, your own entities, your own entity relationship, and be able to find a form based on that data model. That would be much more straight forward for someone like me, as a teacher. But it's not provided here right now. I would also like an easy to use form builder.

I think this question can be better answered by a developer or someone who is backing the network and server. I'm more concerned with process modeling and the process deployment tasks. But as far as I'm concerned, yes, there hasn't been any problems with stability.

The technical support is good. Just last week, we wanted to know something about our modeler and how to change it to be compatible with the Persian language. The Persian language is a language where you write from right to left, so it's different from most European languages like English. So, when we started to use Persian and modeler, the text was messy and disorderly and we wanted to know how to correct it. We sent emails but the support team said it's better to ask this question on a forum. I asked the question in forums but I haven't received a response yet. I think it may be because this problem is a little rare, so that is why they couldn't help us. But I think the support is good. At least they responded to the email as fast as they could, even though they couldn't provide a solution.

The initial setup was very easy, but we haven't deployed the program yet, as we are still only testing it. We have tested how to deploy new processes, how to use the clips to deploy processes, and how to integrate your modeler into clips. If you are referring to these issues, I think the provided documentation is quite sufficient.

My advice to others would be to know their own abilities, their own resources. Are they comfortable with a lot of programming even for a simple form? Do they have enough programming provided in their resources? If they are not comfortable with that, it can take a little longer for them to adapt to Camunda. But if they have good developers, programmers, HTML, CSS and so on, they won't have a problem. I can also say the documentation is good and they have a live, technical forum where you can ask questions and get a fast response. I am not sure if it is available in all BPM packages, though.

On a scale from one to 10, I will rate this solution a seven, because there are quite a few things that could be improved.

We primarily use the solution to run business processes that contain human tasks.

The speed and execution of DMN was a big selling point for us. It's very good at conducting business processes that are easily modeled and presented in a way that's easy to understand. 

Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance. 

The external programs that communicate with Camunda are kind of late 20th century in terms of style and need updating.

We've been using the solution for two years.

In general, the solution is pretty stable. 

It's hard to get information to size it properly if you don't use a Camunda subscription. That might not really be a Camunda issue; it could be a sizing problem. For example, they have issues with very high usage of the database even when there are very few processes running. I had a situation in which the databases were at 100% and they should not have been. 

Right now, we don't have too many users on the solution, but when it is done, we'll have about 25,000. It's quite scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward, but if you need to tweak any part of the it, it can get complex.

We did evaluate other options, but we were looking for something that was open source and small and there's not too much choice for those options.

Right now we use a standalone Camunda in Docker. Before, on previous projects, we used embedded Camunda in Java applications. We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models. For cloud deployment, we use Microsoft Azure as the provider.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution is to create a rules-based API. We are using the BPMN Model to build a rules engine.

We are running a development server running on Azure, and an on-premises version running for the client.

The most valuable feature is the ability to share the logic within the rules engine with the business, so you can put it up for everybody to read. Everybody understands what it's doing and you can make changes to it in real-time.

We found it easy to get the DMN working.

It is quicker to do things when compared to competing solutions.

I would like to see the forms engine available in the open-source version of this solution.

We have not had a problem with it, and it's done a significant number of transactions on our test system. It seems to be very stable.

I haven't needed to contact technical support. I've read the manuals and documentation and haven't needed to actually test them on that. This solution just works.

The initial setup was straight out of the box, and very easy.

We performed the implementation ourselves.

We are using the open-source version of this solution.

We evaluated lots of other options before choosing this solution. We did a POC with the base of the solutions, and we were able to get further with Camunda more quickly.

What won us over was the extensive API and the ability to actually get the DMN working easy.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to first do a proof of concept. See how it works, and see if you like it.

We were able to build our rules-based API engine, and it does exactly what we wanted it to.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I mainly use it in investment banks, in workflow management. For example, the onboarding can be from one box. So when the client comes, the sales guy would collect the documentation. Then there would be another task, and someone would be reviewing those documents then upload those documents into some other third party application. This is just one example but we have a lot of complex use cases.

I've found the active community most valuable but it also provides you with a lot of other features.

In terms of areas for improvement, they can come up with something called a generic workflow application. The engine is really good, but I believe that if they can come up with some sort of application while still keeping the core of Camunda, that would be really great. An application which could cater to a generic workflow, the same application can cater to any domain people can make use of it.

In regards to advice, I would say the scalability features, which are available in the paid version, should also be available to the community. But otherwise, if I'm talking about the quality or the scalability issue, it's still good.

On the scalability side, on the paid version, there are a lot of other options. When I think on the free community side, the community version, not all options are available. But, for me, it's a price over use case.

I was previously using Activiti. I had been using Activiti for two years. So Camunda is just a branch which has bifurcated from Activiti only.

I would rate the solution somewhere around 9 out of 10 because it is very good. The documentation and all that they have done is just splendid. On the documentation side, Camunda has done a really good job.

I would say that Camunda should actually focus on small cases as well. There's a lot of space out there, for small businesses. If they can, they should cater to them.

The feature that I like most is the decoupling architecture. I can use any other tools to create services and the UI, and then use them together with the Camunda BPMN engine. 

I would like to see more examples of using .NET and Camunda. I'm from the .NET world and I would like to use it, rather than Java. For Java, Camunda is great. For .NET I have opinion that need more real life examples. For example I woudl like to see example of  .NET Blazor UI with Camunda.

Also, I would like to see more examples of how to work with a team of users.

I am new to Camunda BPM and have been using it for only one year.

It is stable and I don't have any problems with it.

I don't have any experience with scaling Camunda in practice. However, I have read about it and feel that it's a scalable solution. We can install a lot of different installation and they can work together.

We didn't have any experience with technical support.

The initial setup is easy. I wouldn't say that it is complex at all. They deployment takes only a day. If you don't want to use something specific then you can install it in two hours.

We use the open-source version, which can be used at no cost.

I would highly recommend the open-source version of Camunda, which can be used free of charge, for any software development company that would like to implement BPM in their software solutions. For software companies, it is a very good product.

You can have BPM in an engine and you can use external software solutions to create the UI, and you don't need to pay anything for licensing. This means that you can incorporate it fully, and use as much as you need. You can expand your software solutions if you want, without any license, which I think is great.

This is a good product but because it's open-source, it's always missing something.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The most valuable feature is that it provides flexibility.

Also, it is easy to use. As long as you have all of the information you need on the platform, it is really not that complicated and can be used by anybody. It doesn't have to be operated by IT people.

The GUI needs to be improved, with more configuration options. The backend needs to be more configurable, as well. The security needs to be improved.

Generally speaking, other tools are more mature.

I think that stability is fine, although if you are using your own solution it can be complex. We developed our own backend, and it is working fine.

There are a couple of areas that can be a problem for scalability.

We do not have a complex system, and we are using the internet documentation.

We used a different solution on another project, years ago.

To do the initial setup, to get it up and running, is not complex and it can be done in less than two days. When you want to move it to production you have to set up the security, the front end, and the business layer. If you are using it internally then it is ok, but it is more complex if it is going to be used by the public.

We handled the implementation in-house.

For an internal project, this is a solution that you can install and have up and running quite quickly. As soon as you have a complex problem then you have limitations.

The processing engine is fine and is not an issue.

If I were rating this solution for internal use then I would give it a seven out of ten. On the other hand, if I were rating it for use by the public then I would rate it a three out of ten. With respect to security, there are a lot of question marks. 

Overall, I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

We are using Camunda BPM to schedule outbound phone calls.

The most valuable feature is the scheduling.

The upfront enterprise-level support could have been better. They need improvement.

The initial set up could be simplified, it's complex.

I would like to see better sales support, upfront implementation, and more a more wizard-like walkthrough with the next release.

I have been working with Camunda BPM for three months.

We are using the most recent version.

It's a stable solution. 

We have not had any issues in the three months that we have been using it.

We have not done any scaling yet.

Technical support is good. 

We have more of an issue with sales support.

We did not use another solution previously. Camunda was our first choice.

The initial setup was complex and it took us five days to deploy it.

Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year.

For anyone who is interested in using Camunda BPM, I would recommend reading the documentation. 

The documentation is good and can be easily accessed online.

I am happy with Camunda BPM.

I would rate Camunda BPM an eight out of ten.