Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Bonita Platform
Score 4.0 out of 10
N/A
Bonita is an open-source business process and workflow management platform created by the French National Institute for Research in Computer Science. It is available as a free community edition or as a commercial subscription product.
N/A
Nintex
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Nintex offers a platform that helps companies discover, automate, and optimize business processes.
$480
Minimum 1,000 users per user
Pricing
Azure DevOps
Bonita Platform
Nintex
Editions & Modules
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
There are not many SharePoint based workflow engines. We looked at K2 but the forms functionality provided by Nintex is what gives it the advantage. K2 is more flexible at the cost of more technical implementation. Nintex gives us an easy to use platform that anyone can pick up …
We’ve used both Windows Workflow Foundation and Windows Workflow Manager, and for very simple tasks ornprocesses these can work, although fall short when more complex process are introduced. We had also evaluated K2, and although it had MOST of the same functionality, we found …
Nintex is significantly more intuitive and easier to learn. Has a learning curve of weeks, not months. Feature set is slightly less robust, but significantly cheaper than K2
Azure DevOps works well when you’ve got larger delivery efforts with multiple teams and a lot of moving parts, and you need one place to plan work, track it properly, and see how everything links together. It’s especially useful when delivery and development are closely tied and you want backlog items, code and releases connected rather than spread across tools. Where it’s less of a fit is for small teams or simple pieces of work, as it can feel like more setup and process than you really need, and non-technical users often struggle with the interface. It also isn’t great if you want instant, easy programme-level views or a very visual planning experience without putting time into configuration.
Well suited for low code/no code applications centered around approval flows. It has built-in task management for users to see their pending actions, comments, statuses, etc. It has a very nice design for process flows. Less appropriate may be for generic type applications with complex screens and logic within those screens that need a lot of data to process.
We use Nintex to automate fundraising outreach at scale. It helps us send personalized emails to a large contact list, and we’d also like to automate follow-ups when there’s no reply. If you need highly customized solutions or clean, fully controllable code, I wouldn’t recommend Nintex. It has many features, but it’s not the same as building your own system from scratch. That said, it can save a lot of time for standard automation workflows.
Bonita seems particularly suited for processes requiring a great deal of human interaction. Its user model allows you to control access to business processes in a fine-grained way. This allows for business processes to move smoothly between users and services as the process advances.
The definition and usage of custom forms from the latest version of Bonita seems particularly powerful. It allows for a thorough customization of the look-and-feel and does not require complex developments.
The web interface and administration section have greatly improved in the latest versions. Installation and configuration of processes has become more flexible and more structured. The administration section gives a good view on failed processes, allowing to analyse problems in an efficient way.
Integrations with other services using various secure authentication methods, along with the seamless integration with SharePoint, are the icing on the cake. This makes it superior to other BPM tools available in the market.
Flexibility in application development - The diverse configurable properties offer multiple ways to utilise the controls and events, affording the flexibility to expand your scope and enabling the creation and use of processes in a myriad of ways.
The streamlined and efficient deployment process significantly accelerates release management, allowing for faster and smoother implementation of updates and new features.
The user interface of the pages offers a more refined and appealing look and feel compared to most other BPM tools.
I did mention it has good visibility in terms of linking, but sometimes items do get lost, so if there was a better way to manage that, that would be great.
The wiki is not the prettiest thing to look at, so it could have refinements there.
There is a learning curve beyond the boot camps that needs to be addressed with more structured curriculum.
The full stack technologies are industry standard, but these [are] challenging to learn and could use a learning path and orientation. There's probably opportunity for third-parties here to help with learning and adoption.
If you are creating a process with parallel subprocesses, there's no way to see, in a single view in Nintex, all the steps for the subprocesses. You have to view each sub-process in its own view, so it's hard to see what's going on at a high level.
There isn't an easy way to filter the processes by another user (not yourself) in Nintex. There is a report that shows processes and objects by user, but that's not as convenient. This is something that I've seen in other tools (OpenPages by IBM) so I am surprised that it is missing.
Nintex doesn't really have a way to capture iterative processes (which we have a lot of). It's designed for linear processes.
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
We are currently investigating which collaboration platform best suits our needs. Chances are that we move to SharePoint Online and then we're going to also consider the microsoft power platform (power automate and power apps) to develop forms and workflows. Aspecially the pricing model for the cloud is currently a blocking factor to go for the Nintex solution in the Cloud.
It's a great help to get more information about new feature release and stay updated on what the dev team is working on. I like how easy it is to just login and read through the work items. Each work item has basic details: Title, Description, Assigned to, State, Area (what it belongs to), and iteration (when it’s worked on). See image above.They move through different states (New → Discovery → Ready for Prod → etc.).
Bonita Platform has allowed us to develop GUI relatively fast using its UI Designer while being able to seamlessly integrate our business logic in Java in a BPMN2 process diagram. It gives a nice productivity boost but still requires programming know-how to be able to deliver the final solution to your business problems.
Based on the on-prem experience with this tool, I believe that they have a lot of potential to help the online version catch up to where the on-prem left off. Nintex developed their online version and it is not as fully formed or capable compared to the on-prem version, and the licensing model scales back what we would have liked to be an expansion or at least continuous improvement of existing flows. It is also not near as user friendly specifically to non-developers and has an uncanny similarity to Microsoft Flow in the online instance. Consistent with my reviews of the tool - I believe they have some good approaches to design thinking that, if translated well from on-prem to online, could make this a clear winner again.
The Nintex Process Platform has never crashed or had any availability issues during my usage. However there was an issue that was of my own making that caused a slowdown of the system. I had set up a process to run once a day and check for employees on a list that had certain parameters selected, and for some reason that I had to troubleshoot, the process instead ran constantly, which filled the cache quickly. I ended up having to dismantle that process so the system didn't crash.
Engine itself is efficient enough for most cases I dealt with. It can also be extended by clustering. I have done performance tests with JMeter and only managed to induce the crash of... JMeter. If there are efficiency issues they usually concern bad design/implementation of created apps or bottlenecks in integrated systems. Although I have met two cases with efficiency loss.
1. Java 7 related PermGen saturation caused by big number of installed apps (there is no jar dependency reusal between apps option).
2. Big number of waiting event handlers in processes stresses the database.
Unlike any other process automation product out there. Not only is it a low-code, easy to use tool for building processes in environments like SharePoint or Salesforce, they have really started to expand their tool-set by offering tools to manage other things like process mapping, RPA, mobile,etc.
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
The support team works as fast as they can and they are usually fast to solver the issues. Sometimes they need more time to solve one of them because our workflows and so on are more complex than usual clients.
I used the Nintex training software, it was easy to watch and follow along. It didn't go too fast and was descriptive enough to understand what the steps needed were in order to produce efficient workflows and user friendly forms.
1.Start with Simple Workflows: Begin with basic workflows to gain user confidence before tackling complex processes. 2.Involve Stakeholders Early: Engage business users and IT early to align workflows with real business needs. 3.Comprehensive Training: Invest in user training to ensure smooth adoption and reduce resistance. 4.Leverage Prebuilt Templates: Use Nintex’s templates to speed up implementation and maintain consistency. 5.Iterate and Optimize: Continuously improve workflows based on user feedback and performance metrics.
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or more business-focused projects. We also use ServiceNow for IT service management and this tool provides better analysis and tracking of IT incidents, as Azure DevOps is more suited to development and project work for dev teams.
Microsoft environment does not have the scalability of Nintex; it is perfect for small and medium-sized companies, especially in environments where Microsoft environment is almost entirely used. Although Microsoft offers options to connect to other applications, its platform lacks the development and robustness that Nintex provides. Nintex not only covers Microsoft environments but also Google and other important platforms.
Respect of BPMN standard over the long term. Good enhancements by Bonitasoft for new use cases, for example the introduction of a real form editor even if it has been technically difficult to manage. Once done though, we have far greater possibility of human interaction.
The scalability is really bottlenecked by the imagination of the user. I was able to make processes for my own personal usage, making my daily tasks easier. I was also able to make processes that affected hundreds of employees, making large standardization and efficiency gains. So either way, the system is used the same way, and I was the limiting factor.
We have saved a ton of time not calculating metrics by hand.
We no longer spend time writing out cards during planning, it goes straight to the board.
We no longer track separate documents to track overall department goals. We were able to create customized icons at the department level that lets us track each team's progress against our dept goals.
People have woken up to the amount of overlap after mapping their processes.
People can be resistant to process changes. You need to have the support from above or support from the 'business' that you are process changing to be able to see the positive impacts.
Numbers talk. if you can get a general salary figure from your HR dept to show savings for 'employee bands', then when you present reports, they will be all the richer in data.
