Endeca was a business intelligence platform for analyzing unstructured data, acquired by Oracle and since discontinued.
N/A
OpenText Magellan
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
OpenText Magellan Analytics Suite leverages a comprehensive set of data analytics software to identify patterns, relationships and trends through data visualizations and interactive dashboards.
N/A
Pricing
Endeca (discontinued)
OpenText Magellan
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Endeca (discontinued)
OpenText Magellan
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Endeca (discontinued)
OpenText Magellan
Considered Both Products
Endeca (discontinued)
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Endeca (discontinued)
Endeca is brilliant for setting up simple and straightforward search platforms that utilise only basic search rules. On the other hand, Apache Solr supports far more complex search platform implementations, including multi-index search. Overall, I would say Solr is far more …
Oracle Endeca was the best option that we evaluated by far. It gave us the most flexibility and ability to meet our objectives and had features that were not offered by the competing products we evaluated, but which we very much wanted, and this was why we decided to go with …
Endeca is much better than ATG for searching ATG's catalog.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Endeca (discontinued)
Solr - pros: opensource costs / cons: limited developer tooling
Adobe AEM - pros: experience management tooling for business users / cons: limited functionality around search.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Endeca (discontinued)
Endeca is at the same level with largest enterprise search providers. However, it does surpass them in the ability to fine tune and customize search configuration.
The Endeca stack is a good solution to solve a plethora of data problems but its value has to merit its cost. Overall, it provides a better solution than most products out there. It requires an initial technical investment to get the solution going but once this is achieved you …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Endeca (discontinued)
Compared to ElasticSearch, Endeca has many out-of the box features that you'll have to code yourself if you're using ElasticSearch. Also, Endeca is a commercial-grade solution, ElasticSearch is still probably in the startup category, although they are gaining traction rapidly.
I described it earlier. Again, Solr is much simpler to learn, use and develop, much more intuitive. As an open source resource, Solr is a great tool. And because of adoption by IBM WebSphere Commerce, the decision to abandon Endeca is easy.
We used Endeca in conjunction w/ Blue Martini to run our estore. In comparison, Endeca was much easier to use and provided higher results.
OpenText Magellan
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose OpenText Magellan
There is multiple software available in the market to do the reporting and text analytics. Generally, analysts prefer using Python or R. Or we try to use any API available. This software can fulfill almost 80% of those needs without writing the codes. It has the integration …
OpenText Magellan can produce reports that are much more elaborate than PowerBI, which is ideal for users that just need to see a report. On the other hand, PowerBI seems to be better at allowing users to interact with data.
It is vastly superior to these in many ways, for complex reporting it is a much more sophisticated solution. Visualizations are very good. Javascript extensibility is very powerful, others don't support this or as well. Pentaho and MS are both OLAP oriented. Pentaho is moving …
Actuate has been in the industry a while and the open source community make going with Actuate's BIRT a stable decision. Changing report engines can be expensive, so going with a company with a good reputation helps long-term.
Actuate has a HUGE number of features that can tie nicely into almost any ERP but it takes some time to learn and the development community was relatively small compared to the Crystal Reports alternative. Crystal was far easier to learn and had a massive support base. Probably …
Best fit for this product: - Advanced or Sophisticated Enterprise Search platform: If you spend effort on your search capabilities, Endeca is the tool. - If you are looking for capabilities to search and navigate similar to a relational-database system, then Endeca is not the best fit. - If you are spending effort to drive customer experience, especially around customer interaction with your web application, Endeca can help with that in a multichannel environment.
It depends on extensibility, set-up, access & style. Actuate performs fairly well, but has performance issues because it sits on top of eclipse, which sits on top of Java. Extensibility usually comes at that price. Set-up is fairly straightforward and it can be secured.
Provides exact, correct counts of items in its dimensions.
Allows for flexible, out-of-the-box boosting of content (based on combo of any/all of: user profile, date, dimension being browsed and search keyword).
It has a reasonably good admin interface for the administration of boosting/promotion rules for the business user.
For the most part, it is quite intuitive, however, you need to have an intermediate knowledge of HTML to be able to construct unique promotional web pages. Nowadays, with WordPress and other content management systems that have WYSIWYG interfaces, Endeca may prove to be challenging to HTML beginners.
If the solution is implemented well and the business understands the purpose of the Endeca stack, it offers a great way for a business to explore and benefit from its existing data. From my experience, the Endeca solution has exposed data patterns to a business that were not thought about or explored before because of the lack of available tools to properly expose these patterns
I am no longer working for the company that was using Actuate but I believe they would continue to use it because the stitching costs would be to high. It would require a complete rewrite of the reports and the never version of Actuate (BIRT) even required an almost complete report rewrite
The system itself is very usable, and with proper training is very sensible in its organization and method of operation. There are some downsides in initial setup in the way things are imported (or not in some cases) in setting up properties and dimensions. Overall however it's amazingly flexible in terms of the content it can index and make available for search.
It is quite intuitive to use. It is fit specifically for doing sentiment, emotion, and intention analysis as well as text classification and text summarization. I would have given 10 if it is fit for the purpose of doing image processing and analysis as well. There is a huge market to analyze video and image data.
Support has been very good, and the trainers for the various Endeca courses have all been very willing to help long after the classes have been completed, so in the instances where we're waiting on support from Oracle, it's often that the members of their training arm can help us out as well.
The training is actually really good, and absolutely necessary - although this is software that has great documentation, the documentation itself is so vast, that it would be difficult to learn haphazardly, not to mention being incredibly time consuming to do so. Online training probably would have been fine except for the fact that having someone look over your shoulder to see where you're going wrong is helpful. This also allowed our team to sit in a single room and converse about functionality, etc. that would have been difficult to facilitate via an online class.
We did some online Q&A with the Oracle team, but I would definitely recommend doing an in person class if you have a large team that will be attending - there's definitely no replacements for a large class of technically oriented staff members who can drive conversation about specific topics that might surface.
There were some features we were hoping to get implemented in this particular release of Endeca, but were unable to facilitate those requirements due mostly to timeline. Having seen several other implementations, we will definitely have future iterations to add functionality and improve upon our implementation of Endeca. For the time being, we are satisfied with our implementation as it turned out.
Endeca is brilliant for setting up simple and straightforward search platforms that utilise only basic search rules. On the other hand, Apache Solr supports far more complex search platform implementations, including multi-index search. Overall, I would say Solr is far more powerful than Endeca.
It is vastly superior to these in many ways, for complex reporting it is a much more sophisticated solution. Visualizations are very good. Javascript extensibility is very powerful, others don't support this or as well. Pentaho and MS are both OLAP oriented. Pentaho is moving more toward big data, which was not our primary focus. Others are stuck in the Crystal Reports Band metaphor.
It is a searching tool, and hard to estimate its impact on conversion.
It does its job regarding better searching; In terms of efficiency, it's hard to say: it has big learning curve. It requires a dedicated Endeca developer to work on it.
Actuate can handle 50 to 60 sub reports inside a report very well.
Dynamically creating the datasource, chart, graph, reports are the main advantages. We can do any level of drilling, and can create a performance matrix dashboard efficiently.