Adobe Experience Manager and IBM FileNet compete in the enterprise content management category. Adobe Experience Manager seems to have the upper hand with its strong integration with Adobe Marketing Cloud and efficient content management capabilities, although it's often more suited for larger enterprises.
Features: Adobe Experience Manager offers tight integration with Adobe Marketing Cloud, robust Digital Asset Management (DAM), 3D asset management, and handles user-generated content effectively. FileNet provides advanced business process automation, extensive scalability, and reliable storage capabilities, along with strong document and records management.
Room for Improvement: Users of Adobe Experience Manager often find the high total cost of ownership and complexity challenging, especially without skilled developers. Adobe's tech support can be slow. IBM FileNet's licensing model is costly and complex, with users wishing for more intuitive user interfaces and better support for cloud transitions. Both products could improve their integration capabilities and simplify implementation processes.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Adobe Experience Manager is available in multiple deployment options, while FileNet focuses on on-premises deployment. Adobe's tech support, despite having dedicated teams, often experiences delays. FileNet's support system is robust but the product's complexity poses challenges. Deployment can be complex for both, but FileNet benefits from a more established reputation.
Pricing and ROI: Adobe Experience Manager is pricey, matching its feature richness suitable for large enterprises, but requires careful cost management. IBM FileNet demands a significant investment with complex licensing that can result in unexpected costs. Both provide substantial value, with Adobe focusing on larger enterprises and FileNet offering flexibility for medium to large businesses.
There is a significant ROI from IBM FileNet because before its introduction, the company needed to do all the work manually.
They are attentive to big companies but tend to be negligent towards mid-sized companies.
There are Adobe engineers, sales representatives, and engineers assigned to Sephora North America.
They are always supportive.
People come from all over the world, and they have specialists at the other end of the world to help if needed.
IBM has a different division that provides consultation to end users, and most customers utilize consultation from IBM, which costs approximately $100k USD to $200k USD.
For IBM FileNet, I give a rating of nine out of ten.
You cannot simply add more servers without purchasing the license.
The scalability of Adobe Experience Manager is pretty good because we have so many engineers that are knowledgeable about and have experience in altering the Adobe Experience Manager system.
The bigger products like IBM FileNet can handle billions of documents and thousands of users.
With Kubernetes, we can simply add instances of the worker, CPU, or memory without needing deployment.
Since they are enterprise and have significant digital business coming through the digital medium, the stability of the product is very important.
In terms of stability, we haven't experienced any big technical issues or downtime with IBM FileNet.
FileNet was restricted to DB2's enterprise edition instead of the standard edition, causing complications.
Technical support could be improved, especially for smaller companies.
Many people complain about the price as it's one of the most expensive tools.
There is a feature missing where if content is created on the UAT environment and needs to be transferred or synced to the production environment, there is no direct way of doing the sync.
The response time and resolution of issues by technical support need improvement.
From the beginning, we cannot use a REST API; we have to use the IBM FileNet native API, which is quite outdated.
FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive.
Adobe Experience Manager is expensive compared to competitors.
For large enterprises, the cost is often comparable with other major CMSs.
FileNet and similar enterprise-level tools require substantial costs, starting in the millions.
The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.
Though the license cost is somewhat expensive, it remains manageable.
Feature-wise, I believe the dispatcher module is the best aspect of Adobe Experience Manager.
The integration of customer behavior and website setup is impressive.
There is a significant ROI from IBM FileNet because before its introduction, the company needed to do all the work manually.
At this level, companies don't buy a ready-made solution.
The best part of FileNet includes its advantages and most valuable features, which are its scalability and stability.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| IBM FileNet | 8.4% |
| Adobe Experience Manager | 3.2% |
| Other | 88.4% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 5 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 14 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 31 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 73 |
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.
IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.
There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
