We performed a comparison between Appian and OpenText Operations Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."Technical support is helpful."
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon."
"Architecture of product and scalabiility issues."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The product’s pricing could be improved from the developers' perspective."
"It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 57 reviews while OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 17th in Process Automation with 24 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Control-M, Camunda, BigFix and AutoSys Workload Automation.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.