We performed a comparison between Appian and CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."Recently, we added Appian Process Mining, Appian Portals, and now Appian RPA."
"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."
"I find the BPM the most valuable feature."
"Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product."
"Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up."
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"The product has a very good mobile app."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"It provides a simple reduction of headcount and also a reduction of run through time."
"Jobs are planned automatically to eliminate the need to plan them manually. It also saves us effort because there is no need to create job objects manually."
"While Appian is generally flexible, it's rigid in some ways. It takes longer to do something that isn't available out of the box."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively."
"Lacks business rules management as part of the solution."
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"What I am missing today is robotics. If Automic would like to stay as one of the biggest automation engines on the market, they have to find an option with a robotics solution."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 57 reviews while CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation. Appian is rated 8.4, while CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with .
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.