Uday Shankar TummalaPractice Lead at Sky Solutions, LLC
Anonymous UserPrincipal Engineer at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"When I compare it with other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version."
"The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part."
"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."
"It allows me to present or to demonstrate the business process flow, visually, without having to resort to PowerPoint, Visio, or other products."
"It has an open BPM"
"The interface and the number of connectors that they provide are the most valuable features. The support here, it's kind of okay. But the main thing is with the number of connectors and the UI, the user interface."
"Being able to use a Java-based solution makes the product flexible."
"AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"Good user interface and good add option."
"The solution offers great notifications."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"This tool is very useful when it comes to enterprise-grade automation and governmental processes for the security aspects, performance, and reliability."
"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."
"This product does the job in terms of executing the workflow."
"The most valuable feature for the organization is the Document Store."
"IBM's deployment box is one huge black box. We can create all the services with our own code or without a codebase, however, we have a huge amount of space with practically no limitation."
"I would like to see the forms engine available in the open-source version of this solution."
"I would like to have a feature for audit logging, audit logs and audit log management. And some history of use for the audit logs."
"I would also like a very easy to use form builder."
"Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance."
"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."
"Lacking in forms visualization."
"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."
"The solution could use some enhancements like adding connectors, improving forms and having a mobile app, but everything is an enhancement rather than a flaw."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"Could increase vulnerability and security patches to make it more robust."
"Finding errors and bugs on the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release."
"The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"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."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"If you want to use IBM BPM, you will have to invest a lot of money for licenses and you need to learn that there are limitations in developing applications. You cannot create anything you want."
"We are using the open-source version of this solution."
"Camunda is much cheaper."
"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."
"Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year."
"We use the open-source version, which can be used at no cost."
"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."
"The price could be better. 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."
"IBM could improve the price. It is far too expensive."
"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."
"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."
"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."
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.
AuraQuantic is a digital platform designed for business users to easily and rapidly build unlimited processes and applications to automate end-to-end operations, reducing costs and optimizing productivity.
AuraQuantic is the most complete low-code platform for building the enterprise solutions that drive Digital Transformation.
Delight users with attractive interfaces across multiple devices and deliver the best user experience. Respond immediately to their ever-changing needs with the agility provided by the platform and its low-code changes on the fly.
This is the most powerful part of any application. This is why AuraQuantic offers a long list of built-in no-code functionalities.
To manage application and process data models, AuraQuantic provides a visual data model designer and supports importing data schemas.
Digital Decisioning features aim to inform and automate operational decisions. These decisions continue to increase in amount and complexity due to growing customer demands. Business decision automation is a must to keep up with ever-changing customer needs.
Thanks to business activity data collection, using custom applications built with AuraQuantic, the organization is empowered to carry out accurate analysis and act smart by leveraging business insights.
AuraQuantic is ranked 26th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 5th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 19 reviews. AuraQuantic is rated 7.0, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AuraQuantic writes "Helps organizations improve their work processes". 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". AuraQuantic is most compared with Pega BPM, Bonita, Bizagi and Appian, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Apache Airflow, Appian and ARIS BPA. See our AuraQuantic vs. IBM BPM 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.