Anonymous UserBPM Consultant at a financial services firm
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
"I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
Earn 20 points
Built to manage NGINX Plus instances at scale, NGINX Controller provides DevOps and developers a self-service, API driven control plane for their most critical application and security services. Manage and monitor load balancers, API gateways, and web application firewalls across any cloud, all from a single pane of glass.
The NGINX Controller API Management Module is an API management solution, combining NGINX Plus as an API gateway with new control‑plane functionality. NGINX Controller is designed to empower Infrastructure & Operations and DevOps teams to define, publish, secure, monitor, and analyze APIs, without compromising performance.
IBM BPM is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 22 reviews while NGINX Controller is ranked 37th in Application Infrastructure. IBM BPM is rated 7.6, while NGINX Controller is rated 0.0. 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". On the other hand, IBM BPM is most compared with IBM Business Automation Workflow, Camunda Platform, Pega BPM, Apache Airflow and Appian, whereas NGINX Controller is most compared with .
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.