Camunda Reviews

We used the solution in quite a simple manner. We were disappointed that the dictionary was missing. The hierarchy could not be shown, defined, or structured the way we like. We did not use all the features. I have used BPMN Modeler.

Camunda is really useful. That is why my colleagues and I use it in the company. The solution is useful for small projects.

The product does not have a dictionary. The tool must enable users to build or design sub-processes. It must provide a more convenient and easy way to define sub-processes.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The tool is always stable. We have no troubles. I rate the stability an eight to nine out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a five out of ten. We have ten users. The product is used once or twice a week.

I rate the ease of setup seven to eight out of ten.

We use a community version.

All the business process management tools are quite similar. We have to get used to each application's individual ideas, thoughts, and intentions. We use BIC for our organization and Camunda for the projects. It is easier to use Camunda for small projects. Signavio is also a competitor.

It's not possible for us to define a process as deep as it is necessary to automate it. We tested but did not use DMN capabilities. I will recommend the solution to others. I just finished studying business process management. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for various application workloads, including the workflow for account management applications.

Process BPMN is an important feature where you can write your code.

The latency of API could be decreased.

I have been using Camunda for two years.

The product is stable.

The solution does not have high scalability. It can be useful for complex types of projects.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

The initial setup is difficult to adapt. It takes two to three days to complete.

Camunda has saved around 30-40% of developers’ time, increasing their productivity.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company uses Camunda Platform as a business process optimization or business process engineering tool.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is flexible. I want to see if the tool is good enough for my company to continue with its use or if there are some limitations. If, at our company, we are sure that it would take us to complete your business processes engineering exercise up to the level of enterprise architecture, then we would really be able to appreciate the tool. I am unsure of the product's capabilities because I am unfamiliar. I want to get someone experienced enough to suggest to me which is the best choice for a BPM tool.

Collaborations and process documentation in Camunda Platform are areas with shortcomings that need improvement. It would be appreciated if we were more flexible in managing the processes.

I am unsure if we can get a beta version of the tool with many features, including data modeling, apart from process modeling. If we get something that can be achieved with data modeling and collaboration features for any tasks, including the ones from outside, it would be much more appreciated.

We want a common platform for taking care of customs and domestic taxes since that could be a good thing for our business process across our entire company.

I have been using Camunda Platform for about three months. I am a user of the product.

It has been a stable solution so far since it meets our needs, including data modeling, which we need to do before we embark on analyzing and optimizing the business processes.

My company has 6,000 employees, out of which around 100 people use the product.

I contacted the solution's technical support since I wanted them to give me some facts regarding the points raised by a person from GBTEC, a German company, who claims that Camunda Platform can't fulfill some expectations since its imitations in terms of capabilities, especially collaboration features. I dropped an email to Camunda Platform so that someone from the support can let me know about the product's data modeling and whether it can go up to the enterprise architecture level or if something is missing in it, because of which we might have to get a beta or higher version.

The initial setup was very easy and flexible.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

Camunda Platform is an open-source product.

We, the employees, had suggested the company authorities opt for Camunda Platform. I was looking into certain facts from Camunda's support team so that I can suggest a good way to help my company design business processes. Our company has to look after customs and domestic taxes, and BPMN in Camunda Platform has been done using the custom function.

We intend to do a few things with the product, and I am unsure if it would raise or drop the product's rating in the future.

So far, considering the modeling purposes for which we used the tool in the last month, I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

We use the product to automate business processes for our clients.

Camunda's most valuable feature is its ability to integrate with different products.

They could provide more documentation regarding the integration of different programming languages. We encounter challenges finding recommendations or online documents while developing processes.

We have been using Camunda for more than five years.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten.

The platform is more suitable for medium companies. Enterprises might need more automated and customizable solutions. I rate Camunda's scalability a nine out of ten.

We encounter challenges in finding examples for particular programming languages. Apart from that, the technical support documentation is good.

Positive

The setup process is easy. It was the primary reason to opt for Camunda.

The product is expensive for a small or medium-sized company. I rate the pricing a two or three out of ten.

Setting up or translating business processes using the Camunda platform is easy. It provides flexibility for integrating with different third-party systems. We have implemented the product to optimize internal business processes and improve API communication between different units.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

We process credit card applications using Camunda.

Camunda's process diagram creation and deployment is very easy. You can model the business processes very easily in Camunda.

The solution's pricing and scalability could be improved. It's very difficult to know how to really scale the solution. It would be nice if information is made available about case studies where people have scaled Camunda to a larger set of requests per second and how they did it. We really struggle to scale up the solution.

I have been using Camunda for one and a half years.

I rate Camunda ten out of ten for stability.

We have a back-end integration. So, no user logs in to Camunda on a day-to-day basis. One or two developers log in to the solution when there is some issue, or some application gets stuck.

I rate Camunda a five or six out of ten for scalability.

I posted some things on Camunda's community channel, and I found the community helpful and nice.

I previously used Apache Activiti. Apache Activiti does not have much community activity, but Camunda's community support is very nice.

It took around a week to deploy Camunda by one or two people.

Camunda is deployed on the cloud in our organization. I would recommend Camunda for low to medium-scale businesses. I would not recommend the solution to high-scale businesses because of the lack of documentation.

Camunda is the right choice for long-running business processes instead of ones that can be finished in a few seconds or minutes.

Overall, I rate Camunda an eight out of ten.

We use the Camunda platform for workflow management.

The architecture is good because it's a headless workflow. I can create my own frontend, and it's fully API-based. Our approach is more flexible, so I can use the Camunda API to generate my own workflow blueprint. 

Additionally, it's cloud-ready as we have deployed it on the Kubernetes container platform, which aligns with our cloud-first architecture. These are the aspects we like about Camunda from the IT side.

Camunda lacks sufficient dashboards for operations and reporting. Although I can create dashboards and reports using the provided framework, it's not as enterprise-ready as some of the competitors in the market. They offer ready-made dashboards that are easier to create compared to Camunda. That's an area where Camunda can improve.

So, in future releases, I would like to see better dashboards.

I have been using Camunda Platform for a year. 

I would rate it around seven out of ten. We haven't encountered significant issues or unavailability of services.

In my organization, at least 100 users are using this solution. I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of scalability.

It requires maintenance such as patching and other regular tasks.

I would definitely recommend it. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a six out of ten because Camunda does not provide a prebuilt interface. I have to develop it myself. To provide a comprehensive product to my business users, I need a frontend. The frontend provided by Camunda vendors is very basic. Most of the vendor's customers develop their own UI or frontend using technologies like React, React Native, or JavaScript frameworks. 

So I rate Camunda Platform a six out of ten due to the incomplete delivery of a frontend. Without a proper frontend, the business cannot effectively use the platform. This is an area where I'm still exploring how well the competition performs. That's why I'm giving a slightly lower rating. However, in terms of orchestration, API capabilities, and cloud compatibility, Camunda is very good.

I have used IBM BPM and Newgen in the past. We are still using IBM BPM alongside Camunda.

Our deployment is not live yet. We are in the process of building it.

We make basic use of this solution. It is embedded within a code module that requires workflows. Essentially, Camunda is used to keep track of workflow activity. So, we're not making massive use of it. Rather, we're making use of it as an embedded microservice.

The most valuable features are that it's lightweight, can be embedded in existing Java code, and keeps track of the workflow state and the instances that we need.

The development team had a lot of issues at the start. Guaranteeing the execution times that it will work to is difficult. It's an embedded state machine, although it doesn't give you guarantees of when it will update the state. It can be quite difficult because you can get into timing issues, which is a real pain to sort out. We were able to resolve this by writing a wrapper around it. You have to be very certain that the transactional integrity is provided to the API user.

In the future, I would like to see better transactional integrity.

We have been building the Camunda Platform for approximately two and a half years.

We use it on a daily basis and apart from the timing issues, we haven't had any problems. We have been doing a lot of heavy testing because it's a big, National system.

Scalability-wise, it's fine. It sites within the Kubernetes nodes and scales with those.

I am the technical design authority that chose the product. A whole team of developers is working on it. As it's not live yet, the users are testers and developers, and there are approximately 40 of them.

When it goes live, there will be several thousand users, but that won't be until next year. In terms of expanding usage, potentially, we might because there are a lot of workflows that we could map out of the current one. The one that we are doing now is quite complex and we needed to embed the service. Potentially, it could go across the whole of this business area, which is something that we are thinking about.

We contacted technical support when we had the initial problems with timing, and they were below average. We ended up having to resolve the problem ourselves by writing a wrapper.

We did not use another solution prior to this one. It was all greenfield development.

Camunda is easy to set up. The initial setup was fine until we had an issue with execution times not being guaranteed. That took quite a number of weeks to resolve. 

We developed this platform on-premises and we deploy through AWS.

We brought some people in to assist with our implementation. They were supposed to be experts, but they weren't that great. They wanted us to make much wider use of it, and we only wanted to use it quite in a small way. So, we paid for a bit of consultancy, but then we didn't keep them on.

They were typical London consultants. At £1,800 (approximately $2,400) per day, they were ridiculously expensive.

It is only a small team that maintains it. Right now, we only have one person for that.

We are using the open-source version, free of charge. We didn't bother with the enterprise features. We did look at the enterprise features for the MI component but we ended up writing our own.

More than two years ago, we did a lot of work evaluating Camunda and other products. The two other solutions that we looked at were Pega and Appian.

Pega and Appian were much larger than Camunda, so they didn't meet the criteria of being lightweight. They had a lot of features, which is something that we took into consideration. However, if we were going to extend it to all of the other workflows then these other products were not quite right.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Camunda is to pay attention to transaction integrity. The biggest lesson that I have learned from using it is to do a little bit more architectural spike work before committing to all of the development.

Overall, it is a pretty good product but there is room for improvement.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use the workflow only in Camunda. It acts as libraries for workflow visualization, focusing on automating my company's processes.

Camunda is used for process automation with the bot automation. We use API from IPT software, and Camunda serves as a service for workflows. It has improved the cost benefits on Google Cloud.

Camunda serves as an automation library and provides lightweight deployment to the cloud. The personal thing for workflow automation is significant.

Camunda needs to improve its user interface for low-code development and provide more user interface options beyond the basic workflow. It also requires further development to compete with platform features, like the deployment and development life cycle.

We started using Camunda one year ago and began implementing some processes on the platform.

Camunda has benefits concerning the cost on Google Cloud, however, we have to invest more in development for scalability.

We have used IBM BPM before, however, Camunda was adopted for certain processes. Camunda doesn't require a license and offers a free version.

Camunda is cheap because it doesn't require a license. We can use the free version and manage everything in the company.

We plan to use Camunda workflows and relate them to IBM BPM in the future.

Camunda's platform could benefit from better UI for low-code development. Other competitor platforms have more comprehensive tools for deployment and development.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.