Adobe Experience Manager is a combined web content management system and digital asset management system. The combined applications of Adobe Experience Manager Sites and Adobe Experience Manager Assets is offered by the vendor as an end-to-end solution for managing and delivering marketing content.
N/A
Jahia Digital Experience Platform
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Jahia is a Java-based enterprise content management system. It features an integrated user portal, web publishing and content management, document management, collaboration, and multi-channel publishing.
Liferay is a good product with a broad community and a strong integration capability but a weak contribution interface and no website management easiness.Drupal is good for simple website needs, with a very large community and modules. But it's architecture is too unstable, …
Jahia provides a similar user experience to other CMS I have used in the past - it features a simple interface that makes navigating and learning how to use the platform easy and the ability to copy and paste content saves time and effort when building new pages. The ease in …
A lot of these technologies are very close when it comes to the technology capabilities, but Jahia came across as the best company to work with in terms of understanding our needs and collaborating with us to deliver the results that the business wanted to see. Finding a …
Jahia goes head-to-head with other leading DXP platforms. We found it had the features our customers prioritized without overcomplicated interfaces and implementations. We work with clients who have built out other DXPs in ways that are cumbersome and even painful to maintain …
Sales and engagement swayed us to purchase Jahia Digital Experience Platform. Personally, I would have gone with Sitecore Experience Platform due to the tech stack. Sitecore Experience Platform never provided anything but a canned demo. Jahia Digital Experience Platform …
These are the four we traditionally see still. Jahia ranks high when we have a client not needing the brand awareness of Adobe. Not wanting the .Net of Sitecore, and not wanting the PHP of Acquia.
Verified User
Director
Chose Jahia Digital Experience Platform
The capability to build complex applications with multiple products (better, more complete stack) separates Jahia from the others.
Adobe Experience Manager allows web content managers to share the work of site maintenance while being able to set access/publishing. Editors don’t need to have advanced HTML experience to make edits or even build new pages. Having workflows to allow authors/editors to request publish gives content managers the ability to review content before it is made public. Being able to set on and off times for pages helps control when content is released and retired. AEM is not ideal for highly specialized and customized designs with lots of interaction/automation
In my experience, Jahia Digital Experience Platform as a CMS platform is excellent when you have a large amount of content that needs to be customized. It is also good for when you have templated content that has minor variations. I would say it is less appropriate when the content has numerous mathematical computations, or a large amount of business logic that comes into play with data processing.
It allows us to scale so that we can make a change on a global footer. And it applies to all of the different property websites. It allows us to set up components and compartmentalize things in a way. The big thing is that it's scalable. And then it also ties into Adobe Analytics and other Adobe products. So we are a complete Adobe shop. Every Adobe product that we can use, we use. I don't think we do it for marketing so much, but for doing target testing and analytics, data scientists are using the same product and so it all speaks.
It's still, at the end of the day, a very traditional platform in by that we mean it's a bulk air platform. There are too many components, which means a lot more operating costs in terms of manageability and things like that. We have tried to streamline that as much as we can, but the multiple components still exist. If anything, Adobe could kind of think about that a little bit to maybe decouple some of those and make them a more slimmer platform. I think that would help. I think that a lot of customers are still in the traditional environment and as we ourselves are looking to move to the cloud, I think some of that will get taken care of, but I think that's one area where it would help if Adobe can put some thoughts into that.
It lacks the ability to manage multiple versions of a page or content in general.
The back office interface sometimes encounters bugs or display problems.
It's difficult to keep pre-production sites up to date in terms of content compared to production, because the time required to import/export sites is very long once the site is rich in content.
We had and still have a fantastic experience using Adobe CQ. Lots of flexibility, great integration with other Adobe products we already use and a powerful technology make it a great fit for our corporate environment. Also as the community grows, it makes it easier to network with other developers and users to get new ideas on how to continue to get the best out of the software.
I would not use Jahia as it proved too complex for our needs and didn't help our over goal of customer satisfaction. Along with the man hours to build and execute, it wasn't worth the hassle
Adobe launched the Touch UI experience a few years back, I think it's been four to five years now. I didn't see much improvements in terms of usability. So there's definitely there's room for improvement there, especially around our authoring team. They really struggle when it comes to finding things in them or navigating easily to pages. It's always a struggle for them. I think the overall authoring user experience, the way authoring UI, the way it is set up, can be optimized. I think in its current state, I don't think it's that well set up. It can definitely be redesigned for sure.
The interface and ergonomics are designed to facilitate the use of the product. The creation of template is easy which allows to minimize the actions necessary for the provision of content.
Being part of Adobe Suite means you are already notified when the tool has any outages. However, I have never faced unplanned outages. Whenever you face any issue with the site, it is clearly stated if there were any planned outages and how quickly you will be back to normal. So, I will say that even the outages are planned and managed in a great way like their other services.
[I give it this rating because it] was up most of the time. There are so many scheduled reboots that I don't think it would be a good choice for a 95% SLA.
With respect to performance, Adobe experience manager is one of the best in the CMS space. We didn't observe frequent slowness on platform, however the systems which are accessing experience manager should be of good specifications without which slowness would be observed. Adobe experience manager works well in integration with other solutions, unless the destination application is designed to trigger frequent calls to AEM.
Adobe Experience Manager, in all its capacity, is a great alternative to any other CMS you are using. It helps in rapid development and makes life easier for maintaining the website for multi-language sites. Technical know-how is eliminated at content authoring. Better documentation in terms of live examples with videos would be appreciated.
As I was saying, the support makes sure to be available for any question, or any technical point that we may need to discuss about. Moreover, whenever we have an issue with the platform they get alerted and also send us an email so that we are aware. We had multiple complex topics to work on in the past, but they always have been answering our question
Depending on your individual needs, It is really quite simple to create an authoring experience for a website that looks really good. I have been part of many implementations and many teams and have seen many projects that were super successful and others that were not implemented well. AEM has room for a lot of flexibility in the implementation process compared to other CMS like SharePoint
At Canadian Tire Financial, in the time I've been there, we've always used AEM, but in past places I've used WordPress, I've used Squarespace. Things that are more general user-friendly where you're like building your own blog or you're creating a small business website where it's basically just text, you're not intaking information or something like that. I think the customization options in AEM are huge. My experiences with WordPress were pretty straightforward. Again, it was like, I don't know, like college newspaper website or something like that where you're just like putting content up for people to look at. You're not necessarily taking in any other information. Maybe you might allow people to log in or something and save articles or something pretty straightforward, but then even then I remember that stuff taking me forever to do, to figure out and scroll through tons and tons and tons of documentation. It's just not fun. No one enjoys doing that and then even then you might not have the answer available to you. And that's so frustrating. Hey, it's super user-friendly, figuring out the content editor is pretty straightforward. You're not clicking around and being, "what the heck am I looking at?" Or you're not looking at a bazillion menus to be like, "maybe the thing I want is in here." I can't stand that. I want to be able to look at a page, see what I'm going to be getting in production, and then publish it. I don't want to look around in menus to figure out how to add something to a page.
Jahia provides a similar user experience to other CMS I have used in the past - it features a simple interface that makes navigating and learning how to use the platform easy and the ability to copy and paste content saves time and effort when building new pages. The ease in which you can manage the site in different languages is also a big plus!
Instead of being directly involved in the tool purchase, I am involved in analysis or what we can use to maximize the tool. Small organizations may find it expensive. However, if the team or organization focuses more on your ROI or the features you will get, then it will definitely be worth it. Pricing is based on a number of factors, including team size or the use of the tool. The user can select the pricing option that best fits their needs based on the number of form submissions they make or the number of pages they wish to publish on their global/multisite sites.
The professional services team within adobe is one of the best in terms of technical and solutioning knowledge. However, considering the billing charges of adobe professional services team, it is always recommended to involve them during platform initial setup or when a complex solution is to be built with platform customizations.
Well I can't speak monetarily but I can say it's allowed us to get some sites out and messages out very quickly. We've been able to stand up some sites incredibly under very tight timeframes. Messaging, especially during the pandemic, we were able to not only get information out about COVID, we were able to get messages out to the general population about information about their insurance, about issues that were happening, how to find test sites, how to find test kits, how to find information about your insurance, how to get information about storms or anything happening. So we found it was able to get up messaging very quickly and turnaround sites pretty fast. Once we got rolling on it, we were able to do it and we found that it was just able to get that messaging and sites out very fast.
