Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Camunda BPM.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
Just today I encountered a problem with the current version, and that is the functionality of the BPM standard, which is not yet implemented in Camunda. An example would be a new marker for tasks. Maybe the developers of Camunda can, as soon as possible, provide all possible functionalities of BPM standard in its process engine. Some are not yet supported and they can really cause serious problems for implementers. In the next release I would like to have more documentation on how it can interact with other organization systems, as well as other documentation about API. I would also like more support about features. It would be great for someone like me with a little programming and developing background, to see an easier platform for data modeling. A place where you can create your own data model, your own entities, your own entity relationship, and be able to find a form based on that data model. That would be much more straight forward for someone like me, as a teacher. But it's not provided here right now. I would also like an easy to use form builder.
Hi dear knauf
its pleasure to see you in a good position, you were always in the top of specialist.
your advise and solutions make your customer to takeoff their business.
Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance. The external programs that communicate with Camunda are kind of late 20th century in terms of style and need updating.
The simulation feature of this solution needs improvement. As an example, if I wanted to highlight an event then when I press on it, I would like all of the impacted processes to highlight. That way, you can see the impact of an event on different processes. 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. When it comes to insurance, just to give you an example, there is marketing, then underwriting, policies for contracts, policies for prevention, collections, there are claims, and business flows that we had to create from scratch. If we could have started through a template, it would have helped us kick start the initiative.
I would like to have a feature for audit logging and audit log management, and some history of use for the audit logs. It's not anything I need, but our clients often require these features and then we have to do it ourselves. I would also like additional models for location.
I would like to see the forms engine available in the open-source version of this solution.
The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself. The solution could also use more and better frameworks in terms of embedding them in the engine. Right now the only embedded framework that's supported is Java. It's not a problem because you can also have remote workers that do part of the process through their remote RESTful API which they have clients for, but you cannot embed .NET. You cannot embed that for execution within the engine through delegates, so I would definitely say that would be a plus if they would expand that. Certainly in terms of performance.
In terms of areas for improvement, they can come up with something called a generic workflow application. The engine is really good, but I believe that if they can come up with some sort of application while still keeping the core of Camunda, that would be really great. An application which could cater to a generic workflow, the same application can cater to any domain people can make use of it. In regards to advice, I would say the scalability features, which are available in the paid version, should also be available to the community. But otherwise, if I'm talking about the quality or the scalability issue, it's still good.
We were discussing Alfresco. They were saying that their product is much better than Camunda BPM. We signed the governance policy for "Cloud First". When you search for Camunda BPM resources or books on how to utilize Camunda BPM, it is lacking. When it comes to Alfresco, there are thousands of resources that can help you to utilize within AWS and its Group Services. I would like to see the usage of Camunda BPM on Amazon Web Services be improved. For Camunda BPM, the sense of community is lacking. The company itself is based in Germany. Alfresco is a very small company with an open source community. It is really good and it works perfectly. It was easy for us to adopt it. We are proposing that Camunda BPM can be offered as a web service. What could be improved is better support for AWS and training provided with the platform to make it easier to use.
The GUI needs to be improved, with more configuration options. The backend needs to be more configurable, as well. The security needs to be improved. Generally speaking, other tools are more mature.
If Camunda could develop something that creates user forms that would be a great feature to have. They also need to improve the UI.