We performed a comparison between Apache Airflow and OpenText ProVision based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup was straightforward and it does not take long to complete."
"It's stable."
"Every feature in Apache Airflow is valuable. The number of operators and features I've used are mainly related to connectivity services and integrated services because I primarily work with GCP."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Airflow is creating and scheduling jobs. Additionally, the reattempt at failed jobs is useful."
"Since the solution is programmatic, it allows users to define pipelines in code rather than drag and drop."
"The best part of Airflow is its direct support for Python, especially because Python is so important for data science, engineering, and design. This makes the programmatic aspect of our work easy for us, and it means we can automate a lot."
"The tool is user-friendly."
"Development on Apache Airflow is really fast, and it's easy to use with the newer updates. Everything is in Python, so it's not hard to understand. They also have a graphical view, so if you are not a programmer and you are just an administrator, you can easily track everything and see if everything is working or not."
"The stability of the product is very good."
"OpenText ProVision's best feature is the capability to attach a variety of attributes and extract and analyze that information."
"All the features come as part of a standard license."
"There is an area for improvement in onboarding new people. They should make it simple for newcomers. Else, we have to put a senior engineer to operate it."
"We cannot run real-time jobs in the solution."
"I have some issues with the solution's communication."
"There is a need for more features on experimental evolution steps."
"The solution could be improved by simplifying the integration process."
"Airflow should support the dynamic drag creation."
"The scalability of the solution itself is not as we expected. Being on the cloud, it should be easy to scale, however, it's not."
"The problem with Apache Airflow is that it is an open-source tool. You have to build it into a Kubernetes container, which is not easy to maintain, and I find it to be very clunky."
"Integrating with or interfacing with other tools like data management tools would be very helpful."
"Lacks the ability to have your own in-house developments."
"OpenText ProVision's collaboration management is quite complicated and difficult to use."
Apache Airflow is ranked 2nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 31 reviews while OpenText ProVision is ranked 35th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 3 reviews. Apache Airflow is rated 8.0, while OpenText ProVision is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of Apache Airflow writes "Enable seamless integration with various connectivity and integrated services, including BigQuery and Python operators ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ProVision writes "Good attribute attachment but problems with collaboration". Apache Airflow is most compared with Camunda, Informatica Cloud API and App Integration, IBM BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and AWS Step Functions, whereas OpenText ProVision is most compared with ARIS BPA, Visio, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and SAP Signavio Process Manager. See our Apache Airflow vs. OpenText ProVision report.
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.
