Amazon QuickSight vs. OpenText Magellan

Amazon Quicksight is a truly cloud-based solution so it works perfectly fine and saves a lot of expense in terms of hardware and maintenance. We can maintain it by ourselves by giving commands on UI. If you have connectivity issues then it can cause headaches because it's a cloud platform and it's a bit costly as compared to other services

Incentivized

If you do not have a large budget and are a large organization, I would steer clear of Actuate. If you are looking to do very complex washboarding, I would not use them. Your developers have to be very skilled to work with this. Plan to bring in consultants if necessary to help your process. Adhoc reporting is weak. If your pricing is user based and you expand, this could be very expensive.

• Easily to set up for data sources, already supports quite a few of AWS and non-AWS data sources
• Cost friendly since users are charged only for basis of usage

Incentivized

• The report outputs can vary across different types such as HTML, PDF, and Excel
• Their open source offering is very sufficient
• There are great boards and blogs for developers and engineers to expand and use their features.
• The people from the company that I've worked with are professional and courteous.

Incentivized

• It is still immature as a cloud-based BI tool.
• Its functionality is about 40-50% of its competitor's products.
• Application is still a little buggy and non-intuitive at times.

Incentivized

• The documentation on all the available features, but most importantly on the scripting side, can be improved
• The standard look & feel of some basic options, like parameter selection or sorting and filtering, looks dated and can't be customized
• The server portal needs to provide better tools
• More integration is needed with other OpenText products

Incentivized

I am no longer working for the company that was using Actuate but I believe they would continue to use it because the stitching costs would be to high. It would require a complete rewrite of the reports and the never version of Actuate (BIRT) even required an almost complete report rewrite

Incentivized

It is easy to use and set up no need to put in so much effort. Once build, the dashboard can be used with multiple clients with the same domain. It provides multiple connectivity options which makes it a versatile option for reporting.

Incentivized

It is quite intuitive to use. It is fit specifically for doing sentiment, emotion, and intention analysis as well as text classification and text summarization. I would have given 10 if it is fit for the purpose of doing image processing and analysis as well. There is a huge market to analyze video and image data.

Incentivized

They provide proper support when needed. They are always ready to provide the box solution and make things easier for users.

Incentivized

Always there on the front and backend for us and the client.

All of the other reporting platforms my organization has used previously were within our CRM and not a standalone program. In that we were very limited in being able to slice and dice the data the way that we wanted to

Incentivized

It is vastly superior to these in many ways, for complex reporting it is a much more sophisticated solution. Visualizations are very good. Javascript extensibility is very powerful, others don't support this or as well. Pentaho and MS are both OLAP oriented. Pentaho is moving more toward big data, which was not our primary focus. Others are stuck in the Crystal Reports Band metaphor.

• Reduce lots of setup and maintenance cost.
• Latest technology in market.
• Full eco system provided under on roof.
• Cost effective.

Incentivized

• Actuate can handle 50 to 60 sub reports inside a report very well.
• Dynamically creating the datasource, chart, graph, reports are the main advantages. We can do any level of drilling, and can create a performance matrix dashboard efficiently.