Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Adobe Experience Manager OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Adobe Experience Manager is #5 ranked solution in top Web Content Management tools and #11 ranked solution in top Enterprise Content Management tools. PeerSpot users give Adobe Experience Manager an average rating of 7.0 out of 10. Adobe Experience Manager is most commonly compared to Liferay Digital Experience Platform: Adobe Experience Manager vs Liferay Digital Experience Platform. Adobe Experience Manager is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 69% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 23% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Enterprise Content Management Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Adobe Experience Manager?

Adobe Communique 5 (Adobe CQ5), currently manifested as Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), is a web-based content management system which is developed to help businesses in offering high-end digital experience to their customers. 

Adobe Experience Manager was previously known as Adobe Day CQ5.

Adobe Experience Manager Customers

Metra

Adobe Experience Manager Video

Archived Adobe Experience Manager Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Chief Technology Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Easy to use content management platform for anyone requiring a complex web portal
Pros and Cons
  • "Easy to work with the solution."
  • "Programming model could be improved, it's a monolithic solution."

What is our primary use case?

In general, we work a lot with software requests by our customers, mainly enterprise companies. Typically, our clients are in supplies and they require a complex web portal. They are demanding in terms of quality and usually prefer to work with Adobe and not with Drupal or other platforms because here in Italy, Adobe has a lot of commercial support. We manage a software factory with over 150 employees. We are customers of Adobe and I'm a chief technology architect. 

What is most valuable?

I'm quite happy with the platform. It requires particular skills, so it's not so easy to prepare or find resources to specialize in it but with the right resource system and the right competencies, it's easy to work with. 

What needs improvement?

The programming model could be improved, it's a monolithic solution and that's what we don't like. Some features are badly defined in the solution. It's difficult integrating so we're forced to develop other APIs in order to simplify things. It's a weak feature of the product. 

How are customer service and support?

Adobe usually don't want to speak to the integrators, they want to speak with the client. That's the approach in Italy. I don't know if the commercial strategy is different in other countries, but in Italy we had lots of issues when we tried to talk directly with Adobe. It's not so easy. Typically, any issues are inherent to knowledge about the platform. If the issue is that something is not working as expected, we usually discover the problem is linked to the fact that we don't know the platform well. That's when we ask for support and usually with some configuration, or by using the platform in a different way, we are able to fix or bypass the issue.

Buyer's Guide
Enterprise Content Management
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Adobe, Microsoft, Oracle and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: September 2022.
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup usually takes somewhere between five and nine months. Typically these portals require a lot of time and in my opinion, implementation depends more on the type of projects, rather than the type of web content management system. We prefer to manage directly on the AWS environment, which our clients typically already have. 

What other advice do I have?

Adobe is a more expensive solution than, say, Liferay. But we don't like the portal approach in Liferay, it's quite old. We've worked on our portal CMS since 2010, so it's been over 10 years. In Liferay, the core is still based on portal frameworks which is a disadvantage because we know that to develop something with that model is quite expensive. In general, our employees are more familiar with Adobe and have more confidence using that solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
PeerSpot user
Senior Developer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Data is increasing, and in order to manage millions of assets which a large enterprise has, it provides lots of capabilities (searching, reporting, managing, workflows for automation, etc.)

What is most valuable?

I think DAM (Digital Asset Management) is most valuable to me.

The data is increasing, and in order to manage millions of assets which a large enterprise has, it provides lots of capabilities (searching, reporting, managing, workflows for automation, etc.).

The other thing, which I liked about the product, is its extension point -- name the solution and it can be integrated.

Some of the prominent ones being Salesforce, translation services, and analytics products. It has OOTB Omniture integration.

How has it helped my organization?

We are basically a service provider. It has helped a lot of clients.

The areas where it is helpful were creating and managing multiple sites, and managing assets.

An organization has different divisions, business, etc. and this product helps in managing all those under one roof.

What needs improvement?

I love DAM, but still think there are improvement areas.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this product for the past six years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Yes, we faced issues in one of the projects where we had 50 million users and each user had a lot of personalized pages. (This issue was found when I was working in the CQ Version 5.5, after that, I didn't have any such requirements.)

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No.

How are customer service and technical support?

Adobe provides good support.

If a client faces any issue, through the care account (access once a license is purchased), they can raise the issue and set the priority.

Adobe has dedicated people per client to look into those issues and provides solutions/recommendations.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

No.

How was the initial setup?

It is straightforward.

Installation is straightforward, even if somebody is new and he has to create a website -- he is provided with tutorials/sample site, which are great references.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

There are different levels of licenses: Evaluate your needs and take the license based on that. In the future, upgrade it per need.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

No.

What other advice do I have?

The way it's stored is different from the legacy system, where we used an RDBMS-based solution.

Here, we have a file-based system and all information is saved on nodes. Also, keep in mind David's principle.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Enterprise Content Management
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Adobe, Microsoft, Oracle and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: September 2022.
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
it_user708489 - PeerSpot reviewer
AEM/CQ5 Developer at a non-tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
With the improvements made in Assets 6.3 for synchronization and accessibility of product data and content records, information can be utilized in a wide range of different channels, including catalog

What is most valuable?

  1. 3D assets: Repurpose 3D assets to accelerate time to market and save on production costs. Upload, manage, view, and render 3D content created from Creative Cloud or many other popular 3D applications. Easily rotate, zoom, change colors, textures, backgrounds (stages) and lighting on 3D objects to create a new set of images from an infinite number of camera angles to use in digital marketing campaigns.
  2. Source user generated content: Livefyre is now fully integrated within Experience Manager, enabling marketers to rapidly discover, filter and manage user-generated content into the central repository of Experience Manager. Unlock the power of user-generated content from social sites such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and tell your brand’s most authentic and engaging story.
  3. Social & UGC: Livefyre is now more fully integrated into AEM Assets. It still requires a Livefyre account though, which means the need for a license. But if you rely on User Generated Content, or want to start using UGC, then this is something to consider. There are some rights management requests to make sure that the content you want to use, is allowed to be used. Once approved by the owner; then it will show up inside your DAM to be used.

How has it helped my organization?

With the improvements made in Assets 6.3 for synchronization and accessibility of product data and content records, information can be utilized in a wide range of different channels, including catalogs and other designed documents.

Using this product data, they can be inserted semi-automatically into materials that can be printed, emailed, posted on websites, etc.

What needs improvement?

  • The product is in constant evolution, with several key areas being improved in each iteration.
  • The Assets capabilities of AEM 6.3.4 were basic and with troubles to scale, but that has changed significantly in newer versions where the Asset module has received a lot of focus and is currently one of the best solutions for Digital Asset Management out there.
  • Adobe’s Cloud Manager can provision default three-tier architecture (Author-> Publish -> Dispatcher), any other complex variation, such as four-tier setup is hard to provision (Author-> Author -> Publish -> Dispatcher)
  • Companies with heavy investment in Microsoft technologies and .net infrastructure find Adobe AEM hard to integrate and end-up using Adobe AEM as API backend
  • Last but not least, Adobe AEM TCO (total cost of ownership) is very high with return on investment is slow (ROI is not necessarily low), which is why Adobe's focus is mostly large companies with deep pocket

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used it for the past three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have found occasional issues with stability, but those were in general caused either by custom developed code or issues in the implemented architecture.

When the application is installed in servers without the necessary requirements in terms of hardware specs, users may experience slow page loads and perhaps even systems not responding.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No problems with scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

Support from Adobe is good and responds in a timely manner. Their ticketing system works and is useful for getting to the bottom of the problems.

One thing to have in mind is that Adobe provides support only for the base AEM application, and not for custom code development to extend and/or customize its functionalities.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Being in a consultant company solely dedicated to Adobe CQ/AEM, this is not applicable.

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup is very easy and straightforward.

The application comes in the form of a JAR or WAR file for easy deployment with various tools and systems.

Using the JAR, you can have the application up and running in five minutes, just by double-clicking/executing the file (it requires users to have Java installed, but that is a pretty common requirement these days).

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Keep solution architecture easy to avoid unnecessary license costs. Start with the basic licenses to solve your immediate needs, and only increase them if the project really requires it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have worked with other similar solutions that solve parts of the complete set of solutions AEM provides, but none of them have the ability to handle so many of those areas in an integral way.

For Web Site and Content Management in general, sample tools are Drupal,
Joomla, and Wordpress.

What other advice do I have?

Start small and plan your first set of objectives clearly, leaving all the “nice-to- haves” for a later phase.

Starting this way will help companies get a sample of the benefits, and get familiar with the tool in general.

After the first phase, they may find things that they thought they wanted are not really required or can be achieved in a better, more efficient way in the AEM world.

Another useful piece of advice is to avoid trying to re-create your current solution using AEM, and rather, try to look for new and different ways to achieve the same results that take advantage of AEM’s features.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user694686 - PeerSpot reviewer
AEM Developer / Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Consultant
Its primary feature is the extent to which it allows authors to modify, build and operate their website/page components.

What is most valuable?

I believe that the primary feature of the product is the ability and extent to which it allows authors to modify, build and operate their website, page components, etc. that otherwise would require a lot more of developer work.

How has it helped my organization?

We provide consultancy services to the clients so that our clients can use the product to improve their organization's operations.

What needs improvement?

The integration of the product with other Adobe Marketing Cloud products could be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used this solution for around four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Usually, when integrating with other Adobe Marketing Cloud products, we encountered some stability issues, but those are already being worked upon by Adobe.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We did not experience any scalability issues. There are many options for designing the solution, depending upon the expected load/stress.

How is customer service and technical support?

The technical support is active in responding but may take a while, depending on the complexity of the issue.

How was the initial setup?

Setup is pretty straightforward and well-documented by Adobe.

What other advice do I have?

The product was originally developed by a company called Day Software that was taken over, and then further developed by Adobe, changing its name from CQ5 to Adobe Experience Manager (AEM). Currently, the latest version is AEM 6.3.

When using other Adobe Marketing Cloud products with AEM, I would advise keeping short-term goals instead of going straight ahead to build something massive/complex. Furthermore, selecting an experienced and competitive consulting partner for the development goes a long way.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We are digital marketing partners with Adobe and have been given the status of Adobe partner of the year in the ANZ region for the years 2017, 2015-16 and 2013-14.
PeerSpot user
it_user694671 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior AEM/CQ Admin Consultant & Business and Community Development
Consultant
Helps standardize the branding of pages across an enterprise.

What is most valuable?

Integration is the most valuable feature because it is the main selling point for customers.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps standardize the branding of pages across an enterprise by locking down what can be entered into page types.

What needs improvement?

The idea was to make it easy for the marketing teams, but it requires engineers who are hard to find and expensive to employ.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used this solution for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Overall, there were no stability issues; I have found bugs and workarounds, like on any other platform.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There were no scalability issues as such. It is hard to auto scale on AWS because of the customization, but since AEM is an enterprise-level platform, sites can be provisioned for worldwide use.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support for AEM has to be at a very high level to begin with, so, I've worked with some amazing people; Adobe hires some great people. Working with Adobe technical support was great, although it can take time for the back and forth, as they have to understand the details surrounding your issue.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I used to make WordPress sites. AEM is a CMS and so much more, it requires more of my skills. Companies usually switch because they can integrate more marketing tools easily with their website. Many companies have migrated from SharePoint.

How was the initial setup?

The setup was complex due to the learning curve. Integration requires some planning ahead and communication between various IT factions. Often, the digital marketing departments may feel isolated.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

First, you're going to spend a lot more than you think.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I never purchased it but yes, it's very expensive, so companies have to think about how to justify the cost and have to look at alternatives.

What other advice do I have?

Have a good relationship with budgeting and your various in-house IT divisions; have them understand the needs of digital marketing.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user685311 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant AEM at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Vendor
​Ease of use for content authors and tight integration with Adobe Marketing Cloud Products like Target, Analytics, Campaign; a complete solution for organizational digital marketing needs.

What is most valuable?

Ease of use for content authors and tight integration with Adobe Marketing Cloud Products like Target, Analytics, Campaign; a complete solution for organizational digital marketing needs.

How has it helped my organization?

My organization is a services company.

What needs improvement?

Speed of web response for high transaction websites.

Those websites which have a lot of user interaction in terms of forms submissions, live comments, etc.

For how long have I used the solution?

Over five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Rarely.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No.

How are customer service and technical support?

Six out of 10. The tech support from Adobe is slow to respond and takes a lot of time to fix product related bugs.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

No.

How was the initial setup?

As simple as double clicking a .jar file.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Depends on usage and number of sites to run, but pricey.

What other advice do I have?

Full knowledge with its technical stack.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user685335 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Consultant
The solution can be very efficient in the long-term.

What is most valuable?

The following features are most valuable:

  • OSGi bundles capability
  • DAM (Digital Asset Management)
  • E-commerce capabilities
  • Campaign management 
  • Components re-usability for making pages

How has it helped my organization?

Creating new pages that have similar aesthetics to existing pages does not require any new development requests. An author/user has many flexible options for making new pages. In addition, by adding new pages to an existing website, the author/user saves time and money.

You do not need to create new pages for different kind of products; a single page works for all product kinds and types, by using the same product template page like on the sample site Geometrixx.

What needs improvement?

Integration with MongoMk for storage, in place of TarMK, is not efficient. But if it becomes efficient, this improvement would solve storage problems for many of AEM's big clients.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used this solution for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

AEM, when setup using Mongo, rapidly gains size. Hence it consumes a lot of storage space in a very short period of time.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is pretty straightforward, as it requires running a single .jar and deploying code and content into it. For production, the combination of author and few publisher AEM .jars, the dispatcher, and few AEM configurations needs to be fulfilled.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost can be high. But for large websites with a lot of dyanmic data like e-commerce, or for clients looking for user-data based campaigning, the solution can be very efficient in the long-term. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user685338 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Consultant
​CRXDE really allows you to browse static content data and change it on demand.

What is most valuable?

This product has a lot of valuable features.

  • CRXDE that really allows you to browse static content data and change it on demand at runtime. From the business perspective consider this feature as the online DB viewer.
  • General framework architecture – a group of instances (authors) where content is co-authored and a group of separated instances (publishers) via which content is available on the Internet.
  • Publication – you just press Activate on a page and then your changes are sent to all publish instances, so complete and clear separation of what is to be published and what is actually published.
  • App SideKick – a blue window that allows you easily to drag and drop components on the page.
  • Content Finder - you activate it via #cf in your url. It is the left blue window on the page that allows you to drag and drop DAM assets. Actually, this is the part of CQ that connects your pages with DAM.
  • Admin console given by Apache Felix.
  • JCR – place to put static content available via CRXDE for users.
  • Mod_disp – special module for WWW servers.

What needs improvement?

  • JCR access – lack of transaction from development perspective
  • Memory leaks - problems related to OSGi and bundles management
  • Lack of support for InteliJ and NetBeans when it comes to IDEs
  • Very protected documentation with very limited number of solutions available on stackoverflow.
  • Sometimes developer did not know why some files were still being cached by dispatcher. This Mod_disp is just very much black-box-like solution.

From the business perspective:

Pages were very related to each other when it comes to behind the scenes JavaScript dependencies and their internal structure design. Content managers were not able to understand why they had to publish some extra related pages to the one just they wanted to publish. It is a problem of transitive JavaScript dependencies. This approach generated a lot of frustration. Actually, in my opinion, the concept of JCR should be hidden from content managers.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Memory leaks - yes that really impacts overall stability. Actually, it is the problem of zombie OSGi services.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No - it is better than ATG, Magnolia, etc. It is a first-in-class product.

How are customer service and technical support?

Very very poor.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Yes - Magnolia and Joomla, Liferay, etc. I switched my working places and it was just the main product used in the department.

How was the initial setup?

Setup of localhost dev. environment. Very complex. Actually you cannot start development alone. Somebody must introduce to the concept of Sling and JCR etc. Very, very hard intro.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

CQ is very expensive. The licensing model is not clear.

What other advice do I have?

CQ is expensive but the worth money. If you are looking for a free or cheap equivalent use Magnolia CMS. Very similar in the general design idea.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Enterprise Content Management Report and find out what your peers are saying about Adobe, Microsoft, Oracle, and more!
Updated: September 2022
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Enterprise Content Management Report and find out what your peers are saying about Adobe, Microsoft, Oracle, and more!