Koofr vs. OpenText Core Share

Koofr works as a kind of system for data filtering, which interconnects the company's clouds through different pages and services, which helps to be used in processes of information collection of any kind, and that is on different platforms so that accessing it is easy. Saving all kinds of information in the cloud of our preference is something simple to achieve if we use Koofr as the main backup software, since the platform allows us to run the largest possible number of backups depending on the plan. So, it is useful for the management of massive backups in several clouds. It adapts very well to the formats of mobile devices, which allows us to access our information stored in the clouds regardless of the site in which we are working, and lets us work in conjunction with file sharing platforms also from cell phones.

OpenText Core Share is a great tool for storing files and collaborating. It makes for a great collaboration tool. It's easy to track changes, enable or disable access to others, and works directly from browser. It needs some improvisations in terms of speed and consistency. Overall, it's a great tool for small teams to work together.

Incentivized

• File drop landing page
• Secure vault storage
• General cloud-based storage

Incentivized

• Integration with Office 365 apps.
• Sharing files externally is easy.
• Version history.
• Folder structure is well organised.

Incentivized

• The connection and saving capacity that we will have from Koofr depends directly on the type of plan we choose to work with, and this can make it quite difficult to upload a certain amount of large or heavy formats to several clouds at once.
• Koofr's platform is not sufficiently adaptable to streaming services generally, and this makes it difficult to work with cloud copies of the streaming presentations we make on platforms like Twitch or YouTube, which limits our ability to view them in the future.
• If you work with many devices, the Koofr platform usually presents problems to synchronize them all, and displays the information in the cloud depending on the connection speed of each device involved, which causes that some do not have the same accessibility to the information as others.

• Drag and drop feature needs to be optimised.
• No inbuilt backup tool.
• Desktop app sync needs to improved and quick.

Incentivized

Navigation using the UI is very easy and intuitive. I just wish the file-drop landing page was a bit more interactive by giving confirmation each time a file is uploaded. For example, saying "upload of <file name> successful", and giving better customisation options for the landing page so I can make it look more on-point for my brand.

Incentivized

Google Drive doesn't have the option to have a landing page to drop files to - you must either make a folder available to everyone, or to an individual. This is the primary use case where I've found Koofr is significantly better.

Incentivized

Nothing. OpenText Core Share is our only choice.

Incentivized

• There have been no drawbacks when calculating the company's overall ROI. Because we have generally expanded our storage capacity with Koofr, we have been able to work better.
• The gains with Koofr have been varied, as they depend directly on the amount of work to be stored in the cloud, which seasonally turns out to be small.

• Increased productivity.
• Collaboration between teams.
• Secure way to share files.

Incentivized