• Home
  • IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] vs. MangoApps

IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] vs MangoApps comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Logo

IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL]

views| comparisons
MangoApps Logo

MangoApps

Read 2 MangoApps reviews
20 views|15 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Buyer's Guide
Enterprise Social Software
April 2024
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] and MangoApps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Slack and others in Enterprise Social Software.
To learn more, read our detailed Enterprise Social Software Report (Updated: April 2024).
Download the complete report
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Use IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL]?
Anonymous User
My recommendation for communication, filesharing, knowledge base management, and project management.
It's very refreshing to not have to maintain an intranet hosted in-house; it reduces pressure and overhead on IT while keeping company... Read more →
Ranking
Unranked
In Enterprise Social Software
11th
out of 15 in Enterprise Intranet
Views
20
Comparisons
15
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Buyer's Guide
Enterprise Social Software
April 2024
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Slack and others in Enterprise Social Software. Updated: April 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Comparisons
Also Known As
Lotus Quickr
Learn More
IBM
MangoApps
Video Not Available
Overview

IBM Lotus Quickr is team collaboration software that can help you access and interact with the people, information and project materials you need to get your work done.

Lotus Quickr team spaces, content libraries, team discussion forums, wikis, and connectors make it easy to share documents and information amongst a team, and Lotus Quickr software works with your enterprise content management system, as well as with Lotus Notes, Lotus Connections, Lotus Sametime, Lotus Symphony, Microsoft Office and Microsoft Outlook.

MangoApps All-In-One allows clients to consolidate, eliminate cost & complexity of multiple tools and enables them to focus on delivering many use cases and application scenarios. It helps clients deliver a more purposeful workplace to employees, customers, and partners by positioning MangoApps as the workgrid to all existing enterprise applications.

Sample Customers
Aibel AS, KDZ Wiesbaden, Ahlers AG, Integra Legal, Rheinmetall AG
Redpath and Company, See's Candies, United Way of Greater St. Louis, Lubrizol Corp., UC Hastings College of the Law, EBSGateway, Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Giffels Webster, VaperMate, Western Entertainment Management, Enaya Insurance, North York Community House, TC Media, European Electronique, Modern Technology Solutions Inc., American Chemical Society Publications, Marcaria.com, ReachGlobal, agile360, Palmer Holland, Wunderman, EPMG, Shorelight Education
Buyer's Guide
Enterprise Social Software
April 2024
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Slack and others in Enterprise Social Software. Updated: April 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Enterprise Social Software while MangoApps is ranked 11th in Enterprise Intranet. IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] is rated 0.0, while MangoApps is rated 8.0. On the other hand, the top reviewer of MangoApps writes "My recommendation for communication, filesharing, knowledge base management, and project management". IBM Lotus Quickr [EOL] is most compared with Oracle WebCenter and Atlassian Confluence, whereas MangoApps is most compared with .

We monitor all Enterprise Social Software 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.