We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"I can use any other tools to create services and the UI, and then use them together with the Camunda BPMN engine."
"I like everything about the entire BPM that comes with the BPM suite."
"We are using the BPMN engine of Camunda; we are not using the user interface. We are using just the engine, the back end of this. For us, it is working quite well."
"Easy to use and easy to integrate into the products and applications we provide for our customers."
"Camunda Platform is better than IBM BPM, and Azure. It is more elaborate."
"We can share, discuss, and develop the model together — from a distance. It's really helped us during these times of isolation."
"Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model."
"The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to Pega. It's also more portable."
"We haven't ever needed to take service breaks and we can scale it throughout our company without any problem."
"Good user interface and good add option."
"The installation was straightforward."
"The solution offers great notifications."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"IBM BPM is both scalable and stable."
"IBM BPM is equipped with all the functionalities which are needed for building BPM enterprise-level applications."
"One of the reasons for adopting this solution ten years ago was its ease of use. It had a lot of off-the-shelf functionality, and it did not need to be developed specifically for the project that we were implementing. That was the main reason for adopting it in the beginning."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"I'm from the .NET world and I would like to use it, rather than Java."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"Would be helpful if there were additional out-of-the-box activities."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform."
"They have a migration plugin that can be used to migrate from one BPM to another BPM. It is in the beta stage since last year. If they can make it available in the market, it would be great. We are going to have a couple of migration projects for migrating from IBM BPM to Camunda, and this plugin would be useful. I have already discussed this with them two weeks ago and asked them to look into this and add it as a feature. We are expecting this plugin to be available in the next version. This is the only requirement we have at present. They keep on coming up with different features, which is helping us a lot. Its latest release that came out last month was awesome."
"If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map."
"If there's no WiFi connection, you can't access ADONIS."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"Our developers are complaining that it's too complex to maintain."
"The integration could be improved."
"From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM."
"The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging."
"IBM BPM integrated with Spark UI and the UI is now much better, but they still need to improve the UI because competitors have predefined templates and other additional features. In these competitor's solutions, you are able to use the templates, map your data, and the form is ready to use. With this solution, you need to write a lot of code to have the same quality as the competitor's templates. It would be a benefit to make this platform more towards low-code or no-code."
"It is a really powerful tool, but its entry price is so high, which makes it a very exclusive club for who gets to use it. The thing that seemed to be the most intolerable was that you could put lots and lots of users on it, and it worked fine, but if you put lots and lots of developers on it, it sure seemed to have challenges. The biggest challenge was the development because of the Eclipse tool. It just seemed like irrespective of the development team that you put together, whether it had 10 or 50 people, you would end up having to reboot the development server throughout the day when you concurrently had lots of people hammering on the system. The development server just got sluggish. This was true for every project I was on. Once you got more than about five people working on the system at the same time, it would just get slower and slower during development work, and the only way to fix it was to reboot the server. It became just like a routine. Sometimes, we would reboot at lunch or dinner time, which is silly. After the cloud instances started rolling out, I never saw that again. That was probably the one big advantage of the cloud version. Instead of using an independent Eclipse-based process development tool, we moved to web-based process and design. The web-based tool definitely had greater performance than the Eclipse-based tool. I never got onto another project after that with 50 people, so I don't know how the performance is when you get a large team on it, but it definitely seems that the cloud design tool was a massive improvement."
"We're using the open-source version for now."
"We use the open-source version, which can be used at no cost."
"I use the open-source free version."
"The open-source version of the product is free to use."
"The cost of this solution is better than some competing products."
"There is an open-source version available, that in its core features (workflow and decision engine, modeler) is exactly the same as in the enterprise version."
"When compared with the proprietary products, the pricing costs are much less, even though it is an enterprise edition."
"I think Camunda BPM can improve their licensing costs. It isn't easy to find clients with Camunda BPM licenses mainly because it's quite expensive."
"Its price is on the higher side, and it can be improved. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
"The price of the solution is fair for an enterprise solution that has both cloud and on-premise deployments and when comparing to competitors. Recently IBM has introduced Cloud Pak which allows for more flexible licensing options for automation and other features."
"IBM could improve the price. It is far too expensive."
"Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
"It's expensive. All software is always extremely high. The manufacturing cost that we have compared to the selling cost, it's not like you're building a house or building a car. But putting that aside, considering that it's expensive, it's a lot of money. If you compare it with some of the other alternatives in the market, it's a similar price. For instance, if you compare it with Pegasystems, it's a similar price."
"I wish it was less expensive. I don't know why their pricing model is so high for a piece of software that could benefit so many. It just seems to me that they could have a lower cost, maybe with fewer features or whatever, but it should be possible to do a lower cost workflow software that uses the same interface and underlying engine but does not cost so much that you have to be a Fortune 50 company to buy it. It is annoying to me. There are a lot of solutions that IBM has that are really powerful but nobody can afford them. They know their business, but I still feel that there are a lot of customers who would benefit from this sort of thing. I don't know what this elitism is all about. I am sure they have people doing the money numbers, but it seems like you can make a lot more money by selling it to way more people for a little bit less."
"When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
Earn 20 points
Camunda Platform is a complete process automation tech stack with powerful execution engines for BPMN workflows and DMN decisions paired with essential applications for modeling, operations, and analytics.
With a clear vision to automate any process, anywhere, Camunda is reinventing process automation for the digital enterprise. Featuring a developer-friendly, open source approach, enterprises can use Camunda Platform to breakthrough technological, organizational, and infrastructure barriers, optimize their business processes, and drive their digital transformation initiatives forward.
ADONIS BPM suite is users' best-rated tool for process management, analysis and optimization, trusted by SMEs and large corporations worldwide. It helps you transform your business and create competitive advantage by streamlining processes, enhancing operational efficiency, boosting transparency and creating a customer-centric organization. You can start creating your digital twin with ADONIS already today, as the cloud-based ADONIS:Community Edition is available for free. For more information please visit www.boc-group.com/en/adonis/.
ADONIS is ranked 25th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 1 review while IBM BPM is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 24 reviews. ADONIS is rated 8.0, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ADONIS writes "A time-saving and efficient product with fantastic support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users, but it is expensive, and the Eclipse-based tool has performance issues when you have a lot of developers". ADONIS is most compared with ARIS BPA, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Bizagi, BIC Platform and iGrafx, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Apache Airflow, Appian and ARIS BPA.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.