We performed a comparison between Appian and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is easy."
"This is the most complete solution of its kind."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"Appian is easy to install and set up, and it does not come out with your audit. It has accessible process orchestration and process management. With Appian, the time to market is much faster."
"Appian is a very low code platform. It's very easy to learn and use."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"It can manage multiple servers and workstations from a single location."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Appian could be improved by making it a strict, no-code platform with free-built process packs."
"Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon."
"I would like to see more features for enterprises. They would also benefit from adding documentation and training on their site."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"The product's management aspect needs enhancement."
"I find the Orchestrator UI to be problematic."
More Microsoft System Center Orchestrator Pricing and Cost Advice →
Appian is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 58 reviews while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is ranked 21st in Process Automation with 2 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft System Center Orchestrator writes "Automates tasks and manages multiple servers from a central location ". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is most compared with Camunda, Ivanti Automation, OpenText Operations Orchestration, ServiceNow Orchestration and BizTalk Server. See our Appian vs. Microsoft System Center Orchestrator report.
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.