Likelihood to Recommend Easy integration with the external APIs Workflows can be invoked via REST call Wonderful swagger documentation for process REST APIs REST, MULE, CAMEL, Google Drive, and Box features are available with Alfresco Process Services The micro-service version deployment should be well documented and needs improvement
Read full review I loved it. You will not get an easier interface. You can develop workflow processes in a simple way, one which allows anyone to understand what you are trying to accomplish; however, you will get into some issues if your employees are scared of coding (when you get to the advanced features). For some, this will never be an issue as the knowledge you need is very basic. But for the school I was working with, it would have stopped them cold
Read full review Pros Basic workflows are easy enough for casual users to set up and utilize. Cloud sync capability provides a great way to share documents with third parties and to use as a backup system for critical documents. Alfresco mobile app makes it easy for those on the road to access, approve and share documents. Folder rules are easy to set up and make assignment of metadata easier to automate. Read full review We can write PHP and Javascript code to handle the way the ProcessMaker does. It makes the ProcessMaker more flexible to meet our requests on our workflow. The Processmaker provides a What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get flowchart design tool, we can draw our process very easy like Visio. And, We can use the flowchart to implement our workflow. Also, the Dynaform, the electronic form function of Processmaker, is WYSIWYG form design tool, help us design forms participated in the process. Read full review Cons Alfresco Process Services and Alfresco Application Development Framework integration makes for best functionality/application of ECM. Use case alignment - Marketing content and documentation of specific business requirements and user stories being available as reference material/documentation. Integration with multiple silos for content. Read full review I am still not able to achieve complicated workflows. May be a developer to create a plugin is required. The UI can be more attractive and colourful. Read full review Likelihood to Renew As per the current market and the line of products that are available for content and document management system, Alfresco is a very good option compared to other systems in terms of features and cost. Plus the community support is great. Also since the product is open source, it can be extended or understood in a better way.
Read full review Usability Alfresco Content Services' UI has never been its strength from the beginning. Therefore, rating it from a usability standpoint, I will not rank it high. However, Alfresco Content Services can easily be integrated with any application and leveraged as a backend CMS or DM system. With the new Angular-based UI approach, it's very much possible to create custom UI on top of it as required.
Read full review Support Rating I am not big fan of Alfresco Content Services' support; it works on its own speed and sometimes it becomes challenging to achieve business needs. However, I appreciate regular delivery of security patches and updates
Read full review Implementation Rating Process was relatively smooth and overall, downtime minimal. MSI was very responsive to our needs and made the transition easier than it otherwise might have been.
Read full review Alternatives Considered All software has some pros and some cons. Alfresco has some good pluses, and suits our environment very well. It fit perfectly in the place that we are working on. That is why we decided to go with this software. Overall, the kind of content management that needs to be done in an organization is what would determine which software to use.
Read full review Before making the decision to get ProcessMaker, we assessed different and best options in the market, which are also quite competitive.
KiSSFLOW ,
Blueworks Live , and Bizagi, being the most relevant and
ADONIS , to mention the ones we consider the most relevant and capable of meeting our needs. In the end, we went for ProcessMaker because of mainly three things as described before: 1. Real-time process status tracking. 2. Metrics and dashboards. 3. Ease of use for constructing diagrams.
Read full review Return on Investment Instant document lookup - No paper files to mail which saves in all areas of postage, truck delivery, physical storage warehouse space, printing, etc No longer losing important documents - Previously with paper files things would go missing and those could be costly reports/assessments. Ability to secure documents and provide access to only those who should be allowed to see that content Read full review This would have been the easiest program to implement. It would have been the quickest, and the one that most of the employees would have been able to master. That alone would have saved countless dollars in time investment. Unfortunately, the environment doesn't support knowledge of coding. So, they would never be able to advance further than a certain degree before having to bring someone else in again. It would have saved money at first, but then would have ended up costing in the long run. Read full review ScreenShots