Hudu vs. OpenText Documentum

We are a smaller organization, but we have multiple locations. For our use, Hudu is great for managing assets for multiple locations. I can see Hudu being well suited for organizations of any size. I can't think of any scenarios where Hudu would not be well suited or appropriate. The cost is minimal, and the cloud hosting has been excellent for us so far.

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.

• Hudu makes adding assets simple
• The knowledge base is great asset
• Makes storing credentials a breeze

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

• More integrations
• More robust API

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

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

The usability is extremely simple. It is very easy to navigate, add assets, and link assets. Hudu has many ways to customize assets to meet your needs, and offers some good integrations to help you automate some of that work. The expirations feature is also great, because it helps you to stay ahead of expiring contracts.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Hudu is much cheaper than IT Glue. While it may not have all the features that IT Glue has, it has all of the features that we would need. We tried self hosting BookStack before trying Hudu, because we had heard that is a great alternative without a cost, but we weren't able to make it work the way we wanted it to.

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

• Hudu has saved many hours by simply being able to find information about our assets in seconds
• Hudu has allowed us to stay organized, which has saved us many hours or searching through spreadsheets
• The low cost of Hudu has saved us several dollars financially, compared to other options

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