Celoxis is a Enterprise online project management solution for midsize to large businesses to help them plan and manage complex and diverse project portfolios. The collective suite includes modules for resource management, budgeting, revenue forecasting, time and expense tracking, reporting and team collaboration. Celoxis includes features such as advanced scheduling, which combines real-world conditions, such as resource time off, multi-time zone, part-time resources, working weekends etc.,…
N/A
InEight
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
InEight offers construction project management software solutions. InEight solutions focus on project cost management, field execution, project administration, and document management and control. It is intended to integrate with other construction software for real-time information and insights.
N/A
Pricing
Celoxis
InEight
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Celoxis
InEight
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
InEight offers several enterprise-level solutions. The pricing for these solutions can vary depending on the specific products, the number of users and the length of the subscription.
InEight offer a range of pricing plans and options, including customized pricing to meet the needs of customers with specific requirements.
To get specific pricing information for InEight solutions, contact a sales team member directly at sales@ineight.com.
Celoxis is a great option if you are looking for an affordable, easy to use, easy to integrate project manegement solution. It is very powerful for waterfall project management. I evaluated more than 15 platforms and could not find any with a close evaluation in terms of cost-benefit to Celoxis. Of course there are more powerfull tools, for 10 times the price. So far, for project management, there hasn't been a requirement I haven't been able to solve with some work. It really lacks features for Agile methodologies, even if it provides a Kanban view, so far it doesn't provide and additional agile artifacts. If an organization has already reached a very mature project management practice and needs to improve on program and portfolio management, Celoxis won't provide any useful feature. If the organization has the resources (skills and time mostly) to develop some workflows and customization, it might work but with a limit. Hopefully Celoxis addresses these features in the near future.
Ineight helps save us a huge amount of time in preparing the large number of bids we have to do. It is fast and has many desirable features which make it accurate and reliable. The company has made a lot of changes over the years and most are for the good of the software and are welcome. Some of the changes, however, do not make sense and are actually detrimental to the smooth functioning of the program. When asked why these changes were made I have not been able to get a satisfactory answer. We wish that the company would listen more to the suggestions of clients.
User defined views and descriptions for all screens.
Customizable ribbons to provide an efficient use of the software.
Multiple layers/dependents to allow for an extreme drill down of the work and the ability to roll up to a more useful level for upper management review.
You can bid the work as you would build it, in detail.
The import/export buttons are exactly the opposite of what you would expect. not intuitive and the logos for these should be swapped.
The software is hard to train users upon. New users require 3-6 months of use before getting proficient. I think this is because many of the best features are buried in menus, three clicks deep.
The claiming exports immediately default partial claim items to the user who claimed previously. You need to update your name every time you update a partial claim line item.
There are many add-ins that should just be included with InEight Standard, instead of having to install extras to make the software usable.
Some features with InEight's TeamBinder are worthy of single use, however the review feature and subsequent revision and version numbering could be improved. We will be aiming to roll out the package to encompass our internal documentation in the near future and will be in a better position to judge the usability after that point in time.
I would give it an 8 out of 10 because the software can be a bit cumbersome to new users. It also takes a long time to set up the library and input all of your companies needs so that the software will provide the level of service required to estimate projects. However, once the software is set up it is a powerful tool. We only use a portion of what the software is capable of delivering
InEight have the ServiceNow ticketing system, which should improve the transparency of outstanding issues. However there is an inconsistency in advice within the help desk support staff (Kevin is excellent) and depending on who is handling the issue often our staff need to follow up with the help desk.
Since the original inception, I have been required to overhaul the system so that it is more user friendly and combines both aspects of our business, documentation and drawings. Being able to control revision and version numbering has been a key struggle that only staff training has been able to mark this as complete.
I used an evalaution matrix built with input of several stakeholders in the company. In the end the matrix included 100 features (non of them was price related). The matrix was heavily focused on waterfall project management, agile related features were only 5 out of 100 features. Features were labeled as mandatory, required or optional. Products which lacked a mandatory feature (like providing technical support) were disqualified. Then a price vs features evaluation was made and only the products with the best combination were seleced to continue: Celoxis, ITM Platform and Mission Control. A final technical evaluation was made comparing the full evaluation but also the evaluation of only the 40 required features. Overall, Celoxis was the better evaluated (76% vs 65% of the second place), for the 40 required features, Celoxis got 91% against 78% of number 2. In the end we chose Celoxis even when it had higher licensing cost.
