Dokmee Capture vs. OpenText Content Suite Platform vs. OpenText Documentum

Your organisation has to support the type of document and records management needed for this to work. In an organisation that only needs to store documents and maybe share with many different parties, this might not be the best-suited software. In a large organisation with stringent document and records management policies, this suite is well suited. It makes management of documents across business units easy to manage and control.

Incentivized

What are the document volume, the throughput - currently and expected in year, 3 years etc.? Is the company doing content management on international level, where access from multiple locations is needed - then Documentum can be good investment. What ECM system will be used for - document storage, document lifecycle or retention? Or all of the above? - Documentum works very well if all 3 items are combined, yet for storage there must be cheaper and more easily adaptable solutions available.

• ECM OpenText version is secure and easy to use
• The different versions makes it easy to accomplish different tasks . We have more than three versions deployed in our company
• The software is highly scalable
• There are many customization options
• The software is relatively affordable

Incentivized

• It's good at integration with external systems through standard industry supported APIs, including but not limited to web services integration and file system integration.
• Good support from major up and downstream technologies such as image capturing and back end ERP, Database, and HR.
• Highly configurable.
• Very fast searching capabilities.
• Highly scalable.

Incentivized

• The user interface and configurability of that interface lack a lot of flexibility and modern tools.
• There needs to be stronger and more powerful integration to electronic forms and workflow capabilities which are core to modern ECM.
• Management of audit and content history needs to be modernized and made more dynamic and sustainable.

Incentivized

• Expense. If Documentum costs less it would penetrate more markets. This is often the reason a lighter weight solution is chosen.
• Web Publishing. Documentum is not a great solution for replacing CMSs like SiteCore or Drupal. Probably better as an archiving target for parallel publishing to both web and Documentum. Documentum is also not a web hosting solution like some other systems, it is possible to try and consume directly from the repository in real time but it is better to push web content out and consume from another platform.
• Development. The price of broad functionality is complexity. Arguably, Documentum drank the kool-aid and tried to become like other enterprise solutions by adapting Java, Windows, etc. in the late '90s and it made them slower, more complex in design, and less stable. They recovered from that but it still requires developers with a few years of experience in Documentum to safely develop in Documentum. The issue is not knowing Java but knowing what to do or not do in an ECM system. This is even more important in regulated ECM/RM systems.

Incentivized

The staff is comfortable with it and I doubt they'd change at this point.

Incentivized

Stability is a key factor as well as its flexibility. Also, any organization that deploys Documentum will have made a significant investment in terms of time and money, so not renewing its commitment can come with a significant cost. That said, the decision to deploy Documentum initially should come only after extensive evaluation, knowing that once deployed it will likely remain the platform of choice.

Incentivized

Strong for Core Content and Records Management
Effective for Non-Technical Users (with the right configuration)

Incentivized

I never had any issues with access internally or via VPN. But, the response via VPN, was a bit slow.

Incentivized

• I used OpenText nearly every day and I never had any performance issues that I can recall. That said, it's not terribly fast either.

Incentivized

OpenText has an outstanding support and knowledge base. All problems which couldn't be solved by us (high complexity cases) were promptly resolved and the resolution also shared with us.

Incentivized

Support is better than with ECM, but could use some improvement.

Incentivized

No, it's pretty easy to implement and use.

Incentivized

OpenText comes in different versions and you are able to choose depending on your departmental or organizational needs. In terms of functionality and capabilities, it was able to offer more value as it checked all the boxes in terms of long-time retentions, reporting capabilities, physical objects, and searches are great.

Incentivized

Subjective but here's how I see it: Heavy duty (in order of how much they can do and how much they can handle): 1)Documentum, 2)FileNet 3)OpenText Middle duty: 1)WCC-WebCenter Content, 2)Alfresco, 3)M-Files (3rd b/c it is Windows only), 4)Nuxeo (only b/c of its newish approach that may lead somewhere) Light duty: 1) BOX (not an ECM but it says it is), 2) EFSS (pick your poison, BOX is an enhanced EFSS), 3) CMSs (some have some ECM capability, none have much)

Incentivized

• With OpenText Content Suite, we save time thanks to its features such as imaging
• Mobile support is amazing and this makes working anywhere easy
• Since it is very secure, we do not have to worry about content
• The collaboration features make it even better by improving the user experience.

Incentivized

• After this product, the client is able to manage content security and due to it, the client is able to use the business process, and this really reduces effort and increases the profit in business.
• It provides integration with SAP easily which really helps the client to manage this effectively and with minimum effort system is ready to use.
• Also searching, automated flows also create a bigger impact and reduce a lot manual effort.

Incentivized