Likelihood to Recommend 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.
Read full review Azuqua is well suited to connect data based systems or to add an extra level of automation to Smartsheet without requiring the control center. It is also well suited for people who don't have in depth understandings of programming. The UI is mostly visual with click and drag systems instead of requiring manually entered variables.
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 The concept of reduced code to simplify use by less technical teams lowers the barriers to integration and allows teams to collaborate with ideas and concepts much easier The ability to review simply any error cases simplifies the old approaches of debugging and reviewing large and complex logs While not strictly part of the platform the support team's efforts to assist, to help clarify issues and then (where necessary) to resolve bugs was a large benefit and a key driver to extend the platform's footprint. 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 The lack of connection/card documentation. Every card does have a section with details, but they are sometimes lacking. The help center and community also need some structuring work. Every single connection/app should have a section with detailed documentation regarding its triggers and actions. The FLO history section needs to be more refined. It sometimes does not load and choosing the date doesn't actually show execution results from that particular day. 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 RHPAM is maybe a very good BPM process engine but is very limited to build a complete application.
We also try site soft W4 which needs more developments to build an application. We finally choose Bonita which is easier to get ready with.
Read full review I had to use the Automate tool for funneling image assets in bulk (tens of thousands) from FTPs into various destinations on an eCommerce platform. The user interface was quite harsh in comparison to Azuqua. Far more text/code line driven.
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 It is very good to maintain customers updated. It is good so we can not delay on our responses, and customers keep confidence in us. We are able to work multiple persons on a single case without having dificulties on finishing the tasks. Read full review ScreenShots Bonita Platform Screenshots