We performed a comparison between CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] and Nintex Process Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."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."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities. We've never had issues integrating it without solutions."
"The technical support is very good."
"K2 is reasonably priced."
"It's easy to configure your set of rules to make the form controls work perfectly, removing manual work and making processes seamless."
"This tool set makes it easy to integrate current processes and increase adoption rates and usage for the tool, as well as the process changes to update it on the fly."
"I like the feature of getting an email for a workflow error, then I do not have to go through every instance."
"It is very easy to use events. K2 has useful tools."
"It is very easy to use."
"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."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"It is very flexible because you can design your own main forms, but if there were some templates according to your market, it would be more useful for a new customer. That would make K2 more user friendly and easier to use."
"The solution needs more RPA and AI features."
"The product’s support for the mobile platform and its ability to handle artificial loads could be better."
"The security features for this solution need to be improved."
"The licensing needs to be improved. Right now, we find it's getting more expensive to use the product."
"Difficult to include external partners with the solution deployed on-premise."
"Hawkeye is emerging as a reporting solution, but as a V1 product it’s not very useful yet."
"Nintex seems to be very server intensive. It is one of the reasons that we are moving to a different product on the SharePoint 2016 platform."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 8th in Process Automation with 21 reviews. CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Appian, Pega BPM and SAP Signavio Process Manager.
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.