Camunda Reviews

We use the free version because our organization is a consulting organization and we work normally for customers. My primary use case is for training and modeling purposes.

I use the BPMN and the DMN model. 

The most valuable feature is that it is easy to use. I train my colleagues and customers and I don't want them to need to learn how the solution works. I want to be the one who learns about the product and teach them BPMN. 

It's user friendly, much better than most tools I have seen.

The documentation could use improvement. 

I have been using Camunda for two years. 

For modeling it's very stable. At the execution level, I don't have experience.

I think it is scalable, but I don't have experience with scaling it. 

The initial setup of this platform was very simple.

Often more functions will make a model or tool more complex. I like the simplicity of Camunda. It is very easy to use. 

The most valuable features are the management of internal processes, the ability to execute from design and the model for internal processes, the ability to make processes visible, and the ability to have information about the current state of each instance.

I've been using this solution for over five years.

This is a stable product - it works and doesn't disturb me or the IT director.

I previously used Activiti, but it had no well-developed tools to monitor administration or develop new processes.

Our initial setup was quite complex and took around six months due to some bureaucratic issues. However, I think that it could be faster for organizations without such issues.

This isn't a very expensive solution, and it's cheaper than its competitors in terms of licensing and resources.

Functional agility is the main reason we use this platform. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We are using the Camunda Platform to build data models.

The solution is good for data models.

I don't like the UI of the Camunda Platform, I have found the Signavio solution to be much better for me to create the process designs and execute them. Additionally, I have found the tools in the Camunda Platform are not compatible with some of my other tools. They should improve this in the future.

I rate Camunda Platform for approximately two years.

We have many people in my organization using this solution.

I have not contacted support, we use our internal IT team for support.

I have used other solutions previously, such as Signavio.

We have an annual subscription to this solution.

I would not recommend this solution because I did not have a good experience.

I rate Camunda Platform a five out of ten.

We used the Camunda Platform workflow engine for a service eCommerce platform.

Camunda Platform has a very good interface for workflow and business process design.

When trying to design rule tables the solutions graphical user interface could improve, it could be more user friendly.

I have been using the Camunda Platform for approximately three years.

Camunda Platform is stable.

Camunda Platform is best suited for enterprise-sized companies.

We have approximately 50 people using this solution. We do not plan to increase usage at this time.

I have not needed to use the support.

We have previously used JBPM.

The installation is not difficult.

I would rate the ease of install level an eight out of ten.

We pay for the license of this solution annually.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Camunda Platform an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our clients. 

The flexibility is great. 

I appreciate the compact and clear source code.

We have faced problems with the performance.

Camunda has two options: the Camunda main platform and Camunda Cloud. Right now we are trying to solve problems with the Camunda Cloud and there are significant problems with performance. We communicated this with the Camunda team. We're a member of the Camunda community and we try to solve those problems with them.

Community support is lacking and you need to pay for enterprise support.

I'd like to have the ability to buy into the data model. There are no data models in Camunda and we need information about variables and process instances. In other BPMs or other big BPM platforms, for example, IBM, there is that feature.

I've been using the solution for a few years at this point.

We've had some issues with the performance of the product, particularly on the cloud deployment. 

We have about 100 people using the solution at this time. 

We only have developers that use it. We are a development company.

We didn't buy Camunda enterprise support. We only use community support and we don't have, to be honest, enough community support. It's not very helpful. We have many unanswered questions.

We've worked with many different solutions, including IBM, BPM, Oracle, SAP, and VPN platforms, among others.

I like Camunda due to the fact that I can embed it into our infrastructure applications. The library, not the whole sales server.

We use the community version, which is free. I'm not sure of enterprise pricing.

You do need to pay for the enterprise level to get support. Otherwise, you have access to community support, and it is lacking. 

We are end-users of the solution. 

I'd advise potential new users to learn BPM notation. It is an issue due to the fact that we have to propagate BPM notation to our customers as a lot of customers don't know what is it and how to use and why BPM is a good solution.

Currently, this is the best solution compared to global JBPM and other open-source BPM platforms.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

I mainly use the solution for learning purposes.

I primarily use the solution in order to get a clear view of my customer, including what we are doing and what processes are being made making it easy to see everything that is happening.

Overall, the solution has been very solid.

The solution is very customizable.

We're currently using the community version, which is open-source and free to use.

The solution is stable.

For the short time I have with the tool, today, I can't see something that is missing as a product and its benefits. Maybe minor things that I haven't had the opportunity to notice yet, like an easy installation using Docker or scripts where you can see the functionality quickly.

I've been using the solution for about a month or so at this point. It's still quite new to me. 

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. 

We haven't really experimented with scalability at all. We haven't used it for very long. The process we are running now does not have a large volume. Our processing is not too high today. I didn't push the framework to see how it goes with big volume data.

Currently, we have only three people that are using it in the company.

We haven't used the solution for very long and therefore haven't really had a need to reach out to technical support. As I've never been in contact with them, I can't evaluate how useful or helpful they are.

I have looked at Bonita Software a little bit, however, I haven't gotten too far in terms of studying it.

The solution's initial setup has a medium level of difficulty. It's not as easy and it's not hard. Maybe someone who is starting out and doesn't have any experience with any other framework may get into some headaches. However, I've worked with it now and for my level of expertise, it's got a medium level of difficulty to set it up.

We're testing the solution still and therefore we are using the community version right now. I wanted to take a look at the enterprise version, however, my customer would like to see more value before they agree to get into it.

We're just customers and end-users. We're currently still experimenting with the product and learning about it.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I cannot speak to the exact version number, however.

I'd advise users considering the solution to stick to the documentation and go to their GitHub to view some staples. There is a lot of good stuff in there.

So far, we have been happy with the product and its capabilities. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

We have integrated Camunda workflow and decision engine into our solution that enables management and digital sales of products – Digital Product Center. We use mainly Camunda Modeler and Camunda Cockpit. For some implementations, we also used Camunda Tasklist.

Camunda is used to model and orchestrate processes. We have developed a module where for selected process steps, the user can build forms that will be used to present or gather data by the end-user.

Another module is responsible for defining the products, with business parameters, that an end-user will be able to buy on the platform. The link between product definition and process definition is also configured.

This solution did improve our product significantly. We were able to focus on the development of other modules that integrate with Camunda, and together provide a powerful tool for our clients. Using such a solution gives our clients great flexibility and a short time to market for new product implementations. 

Next to our product, we are also using the Camunda workflow and decision engine in other custom implementations. Our partners can benefit from open-source, as we did with our product, and thanks to that, we get more custom development contracts.

It is very important for us to have an engine that understands the model defined in the modeler, according to BPMN 2.0. This way, we can use the model for business and development purposes without extra workload. We noticed that the project team collaboration is more effective when we use a working process model.

Last but not least I can mention robust and flexible Camunda Rest API Integration, the lightweight process engine can be easily distributed as a microservice, multiple database support, pluggable architecture, and bpmn.io.

In the future, I would definitely like to see the process administration (migration, audit, tracking) and process evaluation (optimize) features added to the community edition. Right now, thanks to the pluggable architecture, we have built features that partially substitute the enterprise edition features.

We have been using Camunda Community Edition for six years.

We didn’t have any problems with the Camunda Community Edition on production installations. We do have experience with process instance volumes starting in hundreds a year and up to 10 million a year.

The Camunda BPMN Platform is very flexible and gives several options to deploy and scale it. Process Engine can be deployed as:

• Embedded process engine – in your custom application (ex. Spring boot application)
• Shared – Camunda deployed in Application Server or Servlet Container (can be a Spring boot app)
• Standalone instance - it can be deployed as a microservice

These options give you a wide range of possibilities to scale your application. From horizontal scaling to vertical. Moreover, it can be deployed on-premises, cloud, or private cloud, including autoscaling mechanisms.

We did not use another similar solution but we did have experience with homegrown workflow engines, embedded in business applications.

The initial setup is straightforward, especially with Spring Boot Camunda Starter. The configuration is in application.yml files.

We have an in-house team for deployment and maintenance.

There is an open-source version available, that in its core features (workflow and decision engine, modeler) is exactly the same as in the enterprise version.

My advice is to think about what is most important to your business case and choose the right version. You can always migrate to Enterprise edition.

When we started to build Digital Product Center, we evaluated several options available at that time. We decided to use Camunda due to several reasons, but primarily due to the most valuable features mentioned above.

We are using the community edition so it is hard to ask for extra features ;-) I fully understand that if we still want to benefit from the open-source version, there has to be a paid premium version, so that the product can be further developed.

Primary use case is for fast prototyping innovatie processes within the social domain of the government.

Camunda has enabled us to do quick prototyping within end-to-end team consisting out  of information architects/process architects/developers and product owner to form a consistent view in business value, achitectural compliancy and technology.

The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to other BPM engines out there. It's also more portable than most of them. Next to being open source, the modellers are made in HTML and can be embedded in your own website with little effort.

The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself.

The solution could also use more and better frameworks in terms of embedding them in the engine. Right now the only embedded framework that's supported is Java. It's not a problem because you can also have remote workers that do part of the process through their remote RESTful API which they have clients for, but you cannot embed .NET. You cannot embed that for execution within the engine through delegates, so I would definitely say that would be a plus if they would expand that. Certainly in terms of performance.

I've been using the solution for two years.

I haven't had any issues with any instability.

There's a free version and an enterprise version, so it depends on which you choose but it's very scalable, but you have to understand it's persistence strategies as it uses a centralized database. That's normal for a BPM, however. In their new product Zeebe, which is a derivative of Camunda, they've made it completely decentralized and scalable via partitions, which might be more generic and easier to understand than the forementioned persistence strategies of Camunda. Because of partitioning, Zeebe is also a step forward into better orchestration in a micro service landscape. On the other hand that comes with the cost of complexity of installation. I would say for small to mid-size companies Camunda is scalable enough.

We're using it in the innovation field labs for the government so there's about potentially 350 municipalities there, and the number of people who are participating in this common ground field lab is about 150 potential developers, product owners, business analists that can be tied together in their disciplines around the Camunda Process and Decision Modelling Engines. A few products in those labs are now being developed using Camunda.

We are able to do everything from community support. Everything is well documented there. There has been no need to get support from them specifically but one of the owners writes a lot of papers and presents webinars which you can join for free. I would say they have very, very good support and are very open-source community-minded. I think they are one of the most supportive companies I've seen.

I don't have any knowledge about the paid support, because we don't do paid plans. I suppose that it would be great because if their free seminars and white papers are good, I suppose a higher level of support would be great, they really know what they are doing.

We used a workflow engine. The reason for switching is compliancy by design. Mainly Object Management Group (OMG) and Triple Crown Standards (BPMN, DMN, CMMN), which are supported by Camunda allowed us to reach this compliancy.

It depends on how you set it up. If you want to set it up for demo purposes or development and start working with the product, the set up is fast. The first one I installed took me five minutes and it was running.

We wanted an open source engine. Therefore we did not evaluate other engines such as Mendix, Pega.

We use the free version, the open-source version, but there is an Enterprise option. And the Enterprise version has heat maps so you can easily optimize complex processes on performance. You can easily see the hot spots that need to be scaled in a different manner in terms of hardware or improving your process flow.

I would definitely recommend the solution to anyone. At least for the short-term. They are currently shifting towards their new product, Zeebe. We are actually currently using it already in smaller labs on smaller projects, such as modelling process flow's and micro service orchestration driving front end ui's such as digital assistants. But there is not much difference between the two so, I would definitely advise anyone starting with a BPM, in general, to start with Camunda. I found Camunda really easy to start with.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.