Documentum is not dead.
December 12, 2017
Documentum is not dead.
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with OpenText Documentum
Currently, I am not using Documentum. However, in the past I have used Documentum, supported Documentum, implemented Documentum, architected, developed against, etc., Documentum. Documentum is at its best, my opinion, as an DM (Document Management) solution. It is the best place to create and store your content for the enterprise. It may be a source of content for web publication but I would not use it for that primary purpose, there are better tools and better enterprise solutions for marketing content (which is the obvious use for publication of content as opposed to content that is used to run the enterprise). Documentum can address most every other enterprise content solution with depth and utility, it is the solution for big needs like being able to manage billions of content objects (usually documents) that need to be FTI (Full Text Indexes - ability to search inside the documents), to scan in 100k+ documents/invoices per hour, and to transform, organize, workflow/BPM, etc. your content. It does Records Management and has a long successful history of that (meaning less chance of fines from failing regulatory requirements). Arguably, it is the most robust and heavy duty ECM I have worked with and it not easily replaced by any of the middle tier solutions or the new, BOX/Nuxeo/Mfiles solutions or the older WCC/Stellant.
Pros
- Secure storage of billions of documents using precise ACLs to control access across multiple tenants, groups, users, etc. No other system I know of can do this as well for as large of systems. Security can be refined from one person to the entire enterprise OTB.
- Integration with other EMC/OT solutions. Assuming this is still true post-OT acquisition, Documentum has over a 100 add-ons that integrate with the core solution to expand the solution to include scanning, document processing, forms, email, etc.
- Searching. xPlore is one of the best FTI tools on the market and it is integrated well with the Documentum solution. Other systems use excellent search tools, Elastic/Lucene/ being good examples of that, but their integration is questionable. Older systems, like WCC, are still using antique search tools OTB and require integration with the newer search tools.
Cons
- 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.
- Documentum has often been a solution to avoid bad situations like FDA, FCC, etc. regulatory requirement fines and shutdowns. It has been the de-facto, at least in my experience, go to solution when regulatory oversight can impact the business. It is hard to measure how much ROI Business Continuity has but we can find examples of shutdowns that cost millions of dollars a day.
- Documentum also has a mature security model and a proven history. Private info; like HR and Health records; secret info; like government documents, executive decisions and information, marketing/strategy/IP; and multi-tenant, multi-purpose content are all well kept.
- For smaller enterprises, Documentum is harder to justify. It has targeted sales towards companies that can spend and has additional options, like dedicated support engineers, for those that have the money to burn. Unless your small company has the money, and needs all the things that Documentum can provide in a single solution, it might be better to compromise with a lighter solution that has a forward path that will meet your needs as you grow.
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)
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)
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation