We performed a comparison between Appian and CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."The technical support is excellent."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"It provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"The solution has a lot of strong features for the financial industry, it is very easy to use."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"The product's most valuable feature is the low code aspect of development. We can develop an end-to-end VPN solution using a single platform."
"The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"It provides a simple reduction of headcount and also a reduction of run through time."
"Jobs are planned automatically to eliminate the need to plan them manually. It also saves us effort because there is no need to create job objects manually."
"If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"The solution could improve by being more responsive when dealing with large quantities of data. Additionally, they can make the decision or rules engine better. It cannot handle too many rules or too many decisions at once."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"One of the areas that Appian is working on is to improve its UI capabilities and give more flexibility to the UI."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"It would be nice if you could create your own customized apps when the business needed them."
"Architecture of product and scalabiility issues."
"What I am missing today is robotics. If Automic would like to stay as one of the biggest automation engines on the market, they have to find an option with a robotics solution."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 57 reviews while CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation. Appian is rated 8.4, while CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.