JungleDocs vs. OpenText AppEnhancer vs. OpenText Documentum

JungleDocs is good at reducing the amount of time it takes to create documents/contracts by auto-populating the documents, but it takes some time to get things started up. Harder for members of the department who are less tech savvy to get the hang of the program so in those cases it has decrease efficiency. But for members who are more familiar with metadata and automation processes, it has improved their efficiency.

Incentivized

I recommend it for any organization that needs to manage all content, either in Marketing, legal or any other place where you need to search, collect, classify and publish content and more efficiently. Imagine a situation where you have marketing, legal, HR and finance working on a project and they need to have access to each other's content, this is where OpenText Application Content Management was a real big win, each individual from a different department was able to find what they were looking for without bothering their colleagues every time. You don't want to go back to this kind of scenario.

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.

• Document creation
• Handles metadata well
• Mail merges
• PDF output

Incentivized

• manage big data and massive amount of documentations
• improve content sharing
• automate content storage

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

• Takes some time to understand and get use to how the program works. Startup takes some time to learn.
• Some of the support documents/help pages are confusing. A better tutorial would be helpful.

Incentivized

• I feel that the admin Interface needs some improvements .
• Deployment should be friendly

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

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

Incentivized

JungleDocs was intuitively easier to use than eFileCabinet and Sharepoint. JungleDocs works with Sharepoint to extend its feature set and make it easier to use. Our team didn't feel that eFileCabinet was suitable for all of our use cases, especially the RFI response documents. We used a scorecard to rank the products and JungleDocs proved to be the winner.

Incentivized

Easy to adopt by end users allow us to select it.

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

• It has been well received and used constantly by all end users in the business

Incentivized

• As I user I can't say anything about that.

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