Flowdock vs. Oracle Beehive Enterprise Collaboration Server

Flowdock is well suited for small teams and to environments that doesn't need too much reliability. I think it has some management problems that can make your life difficult if you have to manage a big amount of users. If you want just a tool communication with basic features (without using any integration or robust features) it can be suitable for you. You should try Flowdock using its free version for a small team and compare with others similar products. Flowdock delivers team chat and collaboration features, but is not necessarily the best product. Maybe some usability problems that disturb me won't be so relevant to you.

Incentivized

The software is well suited in most areas of messaging. The communication features it contains and the messaging quality it utilizes provides for standards, like scalability, manageability and, most importantly, secure communications. Again, the software is well suited for scenarios where an organization is aimed at making use of a centralized management. it is built to provide a unified collaborative platform characterized by a single object model and also has a database storage for almost all communication records.

Incentivized

• Mobile app experience
• Software integrations
• Notifications

• Centralized workspaces
• Strong access controls
• Robust document management

Incentivized

• One thing a little bit annoying is that a lot of links to others Flowdock sections (preferences, external services, etc) will open a new window/tab. Each click may take you to a new window and you can get lost easily.
• There isn't a quick access list to members of your organization to start a private chat. I took a while to find how to do that. The interface and usability could be better.
• There isn't an app for Windows Phone.
• Sometimes you try to load some conversation and it doesn't show anything. It is not frequently but happens sometimes.

Incentivized

• The main aspect is the cost - They should trim it down a bit.
• My pears have told me this. Even i am telling the same - The interface just fails to grab that attention. High time the team should work on this.
• Though many aspects are brought into one product, they lacked to provide individual attention to each feature (like a messaging app) and improvise it.

I go with the flow because I'm a newer employee and Flowdock works as advertised. If it were my decision to choose a team communciator for the organization, I'd recommend we go with Slack for its robust features and ever-changing/evolving software integrations. Slack is the outright innovator in the space and will continue to hold that role for some time.

Slack is a similar software.

Private chat or channels are well implemented in both softwares and both are also very easy to setup.

Besides of some usability problemas I think Flowdock is still better than Slack in this user experience and design.

The second point is the price. Flowdock is half price of Slack ($3/month). If you are a student or a non-profit organization, you are able to get some special license.

Incentivized

The only feature that makes Beehive Enterprise Collaborative software stack up against similar software is unification. It is wholly unified. Basically, it allows IT to function as one platform providing services like email, team workspace, and conferencing. Uniquely, this results in saving time and cost related to managing separate systems

Incentivized

• Our company uses it by default.
• I enjoy the ability to communicate outside of text messages...keeps the conversation on in it's own bucket.

• Improved control over project documents, approvals, and version history, which reduced rework and helped teams meet deadlines.
• Strong access controls supported audit and compliance needs, reducing risk and improving review efficiency.
• Positive in environments where security, document control, and structured workflows are priorities.

Incentivized