Likelihood to Recommend
Very good : to design and execute business processes with just a few data. You can use BDM and it’s easy. It’s really easy to get data from external applications using custom connectors. less appropriate : if you use complex BDM tree objects, using them in form can significantly decrease performance. Be careful to follow guidelines that are given in Bonita Documentation.
Read full review
Domino is best in medium-sized businesses of 20-100 employees. It's too complicated to implement in very small companies unless you have good external resources. It scales up very well for larger companies but the pressures of users wanting particular "brand-name" software can become difficult. If you want a restricted "extranet/portal" system for a limited set of members it's a great system, particularly if you add a Domino CRM on top. Unlike Microsoft, you never have to resort to command-line tools, like PowerShell, in Domino to get things done.
Read full review Pros 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. Read full review Domino support for policy-based user registration and deployment eases end-user creation. User access to databases is simplified via group membership and defined roles. Email replication to clustered servers is simplified through connection/replication documents stored centralized address book Group calendaring enabled at client level controls. Read full review Cons 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. Read full review User interface needs to be modernised. Read full review Likelihood to Renew
We just renewed our license
Read full review Usability
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.
Read full review Performance
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.
Read full review Support Rating
It was sometimes difficult to get support on Bonita API.
Read full review Implementation Rating
Nothing in particular
Read full review Alternatives Considered
The Bonita platform is by far the most complete and flexible solution as a BPM suite with the added advantage that the Community edition is usable for production deployment. From a cost perspective, Bonitasoft licenses the subscription edition per server with no limitations as to hardware, users, processes, etc.
Read full review
, SQL and Teams but only for the things that they excel in. For example, we use teams for small team interactions (including external participants). We use teams for meetings too. We've discovered that Teams collaboration is not as full-functional as Domino and more importantly, that our members (financial services) do not trust the Open Office365 cloud.
and Team collaborative features are often blocked in our member organizations. Domino is much easier to identify and unblock at the firewall level. It's much easier to restrict collaboration to approved options in Domino.
Read full review Scalability
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.
Read full review Return on Investment Case management provided as better tracking which help us to meet SLAs. Auto email notification helps to address "Where are my request" answers which eventually increased our customer delight index. By using the third-party integration, we are able to provide visibility w.r.t end to end request status. Read full review The immediate impact on my organization as a non-profit is cost. Enterprise pricing for a Domino solution is exponentially more inexpensive than more popular applications. Of the most obvious impacts is user familiarity. Given a vast majority of the employment pool having familiarity with MS products, orienting new employees to Domino\Notes is burdensome. Adoption is slow and resistance is high. Hiring Domino administrators and developers is increasingly challenging. The recent sale of the Domino platform away from IBM is concerning. Read full review ScreenShots Bonita Platform Screenshots