What users are saying about
17 Ratings
9 Ratings
17 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 6 out of 100
9 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 7.6 out of 100

Feature Set Ratings

  • Abstract ranks higher in 1 feature set: Communication
  • Thomson Reuters HighQ ranks higher in 2 feature sets: Project Management, File Sharing & Management

Project Management

7.8

Abstract

78%
8.2

HighQ

82%
Thomson Reuters HighQ ranks higher in 6/6 features

Workflow Automation

7.6
76%
2 Ratings
9.0
90%
1 Rating

Mobile Access

7.0
70%
3 Ratings
9.3
93%
2 Ratings

Search

8.9
89%
3 Ratings
9.6
96%
2 Ratings

Task Management

N/A
0 Ratings
8.0
80%
1 Rating

Scheduling

N/A
0 Ratings
8.0
80%
1 Rating

Visual planning tools

N/A
0 Ratings
5.0
50%
1 Rating

Communication

8.7

Abstract

87%
8.6

HighQ

86%
Thomson Reuters HighQ ranks higher in 3/5 features

Chat

10.0
100%
2 Ratings
9.0
90%
1 Rating

Notifications

9.1
91%
4 Ratings
9.0
90%
2 Ratings

Discussions

8.0
80%
4 Ratings
9.0
90%
1 Rating

Internal knowledgebase

7.6
76%
2 Ratings
10.0
100%
1 Rating

Surveys

N/A
0 Ratings
6.0
60%
1 Rating

File Sharing & Management

8.1

Abstract

81%
9.4

HighQ

94%
Thomson Reuters HighQ ranks higher in 6/7 features

Versioning

10.0
100%
4 Ratings
10.0
100%
1 Rating

Document collaboration

8.5
85%
3 Ratings
9.2
92%
2 Ratings

Access control

6.2
62%
4 Ratings
9.2
92%
2 Ratings

Advanced security features

6.8
68%
2 Ratings
10.0
100%
2 Ratings

Device sync

9.1
91%
3 Ratings
N/A
0 Ratings

Video files

N/A
0 Ratings
9.0
90%
1 Rating

Audio files

N/A
0 Ratings
9.0
90%
1 Rating

Attribute Ratings

  • Thomson Reuters HighQ is rated higher in 2 areas: Likelihood to Recommend, Support Rating

Likelihood to Recommend

2.3

Abstract

23%
4 Ratings
9.2

HighQ

92%
2 Ratings

Usability

7.0

Abstract

70%
1 Rating

HighQ

N/A
0 Ratings

Support Rating

8.7

Abstract

87%
7 Ratings
10.0

HighQ

100%
2 Ratings

Likelihood to Recommend

Abstract

  • Large teams with dedicated design operations support
  • UX managers that want a facilitated workflow for their teams
  • Disciplined teams of individual contributors that want to adopt a process in their UI workflow
  • Cross-discipline teams that want a central collaboration space for reviewing and critiquing UI artifacts
  • If your files are named "FOR-REALS_FINAL_FINAL_FINAL_Super-Important-Project (copy).sketch"
  • If you're managing multiple pattern libraries
Read full review

Thomson Reuters

HighQ Collaborate is well suited to situations where a law firm maintains numerous documents for a client and the client needs access to them on a regular basis. For example, we may store the client's minute book (which is relatively common for a large corporate law firm to do), but the client may need access to documents in that minute book on a regular basis. Likewise, we have an internal system at the firm for hosting digital versions of closing books, however, many clients would not have a similar system because they would only receive closing books irregularly. USBs get lost and the client might not want to put the closing book on the main server where anyone can access it. By putting the closing book on the extranet site, the individuals in the client's organization who should be able to access the closing book can do so.
Read full review

Pros

Abstract

  • Versioning for desginers
  • Collaboration between team members
Read full review

Thomson Reuters

  • Document sharing. This product makes it easy to upload, review and organize documents related to a particular project or matter.
  • Permissions. Collaborate allows very granular permissions to be assigned for shared documents and administrative activities such as workflows.
  • Reliability. The product is cloud-based and rarely, if ever, unavailable.
Read full review

Cons

Abstract

  • Asset exports are not as great as Zeplin and others.
  • Filtering within files.
Read full review

Thomson Reuters

  • It is just not that exciting. We host documents on there for clients but the extranet sites have ultimately turned out to not be a product that our clients are clamoring for or that we are regularly pushing.
Read full review

Pricing Details

Abstract

Starting Price

Editions & Modules

Abstract editions and modules pricing
EditionModules

Footnotes

    Offerings

    Free Trial
    Free/Freemium Version
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services

    Entry-level set up fee?

    No setup fee

    Additional Details

    HighQ

    Starting Price

    Editions & Modules

    HighQ editions and modules pricing
    EditionModules

    Footnotes

      Offerings

      Free Trial
      Free/Freemium Version
      Premium Consulting/Integration Services

      Entry-level set up fee?

      No setup fee

      Additional Details

      Usability

      Abstract

      Abstract has a difficult learning curve. If a feature-branch workflow is new to you, then it will take some getting used to. They make a lot of updates to the interface and these feature releases get ahead of their documentation. They rely heavily on an excellent customer support team and are present on various Slack channels to help design professionals with issues.
      Read full review

      Thomson Reuters

      No answers on this topic

      Support Rating

      Abstract

      Abstract by nature is complex and has to respond to whatever changes in Sketch. So there are frequent issues. Support can be slow to respond and are not always helpful, but they are quick to find and patch the bugs. Overall, it's not the best support, but it hasn't been detrimental.
      Read full review

      Thomson Reuters

      The interface is easy to use and overall the software seems pretty robust (I haven't had any crashes yet), so I haven't had to use the support very often. Likewise, I don't think I've ever had a client e-mail me with questions or issues - the software is pretty idiot-proof.
      Read full review

      Alternatives Considered

      Abstract

      I purchased and administer Abstract. It was requested by our design department who evaluated it.
      Read full review

      Thomson Reuters

      I feel that HighQ does not really have any real competition in this space because it simply accomplishes its goals far better than the competition at lower cost, while requiring less training and administration.
      Read full review

      Return on Investment

      Abstract

      • Single source of truth for the team.
      • Could quickly get expensive with corporate accounts.
      Read full review

      Thomson Reuters

      • Permits fairly simple administration by a single person for hundreds of Extranets
      • One shop stopping for reliable, secure document sharing and signing with external parties
      • Simple enough to use that internal and external users do not need training to take advantage of the product.
      Read full review

      Add comparison