We performed a comparison between Alfresco and OpenText Extended ECM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"Document repository."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"Smart Viewing videos are most valuable for the end users. The end users like the look and feel of Smart View. It's similar to SharePoint, with the latest HTML5 features, filters, and everything. It's like online shopping."
"Retention is useful. I have been pleased with the search functionality and the extensibility for tying it into integrations with other systems and building workflows on top of it."
"We use Core Share to share documents with external auditors or with vendors, and that prevents them from being able to get into the whole system. It is useful."
"The integration of a document management platform with many other applications, e.g. SAP, SuccessFactors, Salesforce, SharePoint, etc."
"Being able to tag metadata on documents and being able to have different workspaces in there for our documents is valuable. We do loan documents, and different types of documents have different types of retentions. We are able to categorize based on that, and we are able to do tag searching to find what we are looking for."
"The ability to add metadata and use that to categorize information is a valuable feature of OpenText Extended ECM."
"WebReports has a lot of capabilities that offer good opportunities to customize the applications the way we want to."
"The tool's most valuable features are document storage, security, and compliance."
"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"I think the presentation layer could be improved - currently, it's too complex, and there are too many features cluttered all over the screen."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"We are looking for new, advanced UI features. Currently, the UI does not look great."
"The solution needs to improve the user interface."
"Initially there can be stability issues due to unknown factors such as usage of the system, quantity of documents ingested, load during peak hours."
"A dashboard with information would be nice to see."
"OpenText Extended ECM's user interface could be improved."
"The solution should work better with partners and be more developer-friendly."
"The annotation tool needs improvement. In other tools, such as Hyland OnBase, you can easily do annotation. You can easily merge documents. You can easily compare documents, whereas with OpenText, it seems to be a challenge."
"I have not used it enough to start running into issues. Some of my technical guys could name a couple of things, but in terms of support, we did have challenges getting good responses from them."
Alfresco is ranked 9th in Enterprise Content Management with 10 reviews while OpenText Extended ECM is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Content Management with 18 reviews. Alfresco is rated 8.0, while OpenText Extended ECM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Alfresco writes "Flexible and customizable but lacking integration with Microsoft". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Extended ECM writes "Serves as a single source of support for the company but has scalability issues". Alfresco is most compared with SharePoint, Hyland OnBase, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet and Nuxeo, whereas OpenText Extended ECM is most compared with OpenText Documentum, SharePoint, IBM FileNet, OpenText Content Manager and Hyland OnBase.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.
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.