HCL Connections vs. Mattermost

IBM Connections is possibly most suited for larger organizations where bigger teams are able to have more people to share with. Also, it may be less appropriate when there is so much security that it would hinder the anytime, anywhere access capabilities and prevent users from being able to enjoy sharing content with each other.

Incentivized

Mattermost is definitely appropriate for a growing company with team members spread out across the u.s. and Canada. It’s given me the ability to have access to anyone with the information I need or the ability to develop friendships, working relationships with people I otherwise wouldn’t have access to

Incentivized

• Connections has an easy to understand layout so if you are new to the tool you can catch on quickly.
• The security features are excellent, I feel comfortable that we will not get hacked.
• Connections provide a single place to store project docs, pics, emails and to collaborate real-time with your team.

Incentivized

• Easy intergration to our main CRM (Monday.com)
• I'm not techy myself but I have seen a lot of our previous integrations in Slack transferred over to Mattermost so that's fun
• The desktop and phone app (android) works well enough. I haven't tried it on the Apple ecosystem yet.

Incentivized

• Search in connections is incredibly poor. It's commonly joked that once data goes into Connections, you never find it again, unless you have a direct link. This alone kills usability for Connections.
• Embedded content in wiki pages in connections is poorly implemented. While the content displays, you can't interact with it, or edit it reasonably, and it's really slow to load.
• The "social" features in Connections are pretty lame, and no self-respecting user spends any time trying to build their profile. It's just disappointing.

Incentivized

• Basic features like custom status, collapsed reply threads are JUST rolling out - kind of slow for a workplace chat app.
• I don't really get the idea of Playbooks and Boards - there are better, dedicated tools for stuff like this and it's not so easy to turn off.

Incentivized

Connections has continued to more than meet our needs from a collaboration point of view and we are currently working on integration with our IBM Websphere portal platform to provide an integrated collaboration solution. This scenario will provide our users the best both products have to offer in a single interface.

Incentivized

Mattermost works perfectly within our company as a way to communicate seamlessly. I have had no issues with the product and continue to use it often while on and off site. The mobile app allows me to continue to communicate with my team even when I don't have my laptop with me.

Incentivized

Connections combines all the most useful abilities from various social networks. This makes it useful of course, but it also reduces user adoption time initially by allowing users to get comfortable with basic features. Once they are comfortable, it's easy for users to start exploring. They find new people in the organization to contact, new sources of information, etc. Before you know it, about half of the users are contributing back in some form -- and all with little or no training needed by IT.

Incentivized

Since it helps track all the things at one place and the bots can be made which helps to automate many tasks. We use it in our security incident tracking in which there are pre defined tasks like adding people, creating groups, launching bots. All these things make the work easier and oraganized

Incentivized

Once Connections was installed, patched, etc. it was ALWAYS up. We only had to bring it down for OS updates to the servers. That seems to be typical of anything that runs on WebSphere; it's bulletproof and could probably run for months and years if the underlying OS didn't require constant patching.

Incentivized

IBM Connections web UI, mobile app (data sync to / from the device), and file transfer speeds were almost always very fast. It was rare for a slow-down of any kind, even when doing searches.

Incentivized

IBM Support has ALWAYS been quick to respond, regardless of the product. Even first level techs seldom provide "canned" responses and they really try to help. If they can't help, they don't wallow around but engage the right person immediately. It's very rare that the first level tech needs to escalate, and even more rare when they do escalate and the next person engaged cannot solve it. We have been more than satisfied with IBM support's quick and professional responses to our issues.

Incentivized

We have not had to contact support for Mattermost ever. All that we have needed has been available in the documentation or website. One of our DevOps team members set it up in a couple of hours. The whole team was using Mattermost that same day. No support needed.

Incentivized

Try to understand you will never find a product which suites all your end user for 100%. IBM Connections is the best of all breeds but if you go look on each functionality on its own there are better example out there. But as IBM COnnections delivers it all in just one platform makes it the best example about integration of different functionality into one platform.

This went as expected. No surprises or major hurdles.

Incentivized

IBM Connections offers a complete package of tools that can be useful but it doesn't integrate well with other services. Competitors like Yammer offer slightly fewer features but are cheaper and much easier to maintain. If we were making a decision today we probably would choose a combination of Yammer, Slack, Microsoft Teams, and other Microsoft or Google Tools.

Incentivized

Unlike Slack and Discord, Mattermost is self-hosted and focused on security. I used Discord before for community management and much simpler and less secure operations. Slack is great, but the fact that is cloud based takes out a lot of its independence.

Incentivized

Scaling UP is never an issue with IBM's core technologies like WebSphere, DB2, etc. as long as you have or can find the technical resources to implement it. Where IBM seems to fail is scaling DOWN for smaller organizations. Connections 5.0 on-premises would have required us to create 7 servers -- yes, they would be virtualized, but still that's 7 OS licenses, 40 virtual CPU cores, 80GB RAM, and a few TB of hard disk space. All to replace Quick which runs on 1 server with 1 OS license, 4 cores, 8GB RAM and 600GB of disk. Granted, there are major differences in capabilities between the two, but how do you get a CFO understand why features like a mobile app, file sync, and social sharing require 10x the back-end resources?

Incentivized

• Positive - Using IBM Connections has reduced the number of directories and file share repositories previously used for collaboration.
• Positive - The direction is to stop relying on email for the only method of communicating and sharing knowledge. IBM Connections is in the right step.

Incentivized

• The platform is adaptive to storage data center outages in case our cloud storage provider goes away, Mattermost still works with our local database. However, files couldn't be shared. We can switch storage to local temporarily; that's a benefit. Later it all syncs up to main storage.
• When our team switched to Mattermost from paid solutions, we had much savings and access to unlimited past messages and storage quota (we use our cloud storage provider)
• We have better visibility of our tools and other products running adjacent to Mattermost due to integration capability. We use it for notifications/ updates sent from other products.

Incentivized