AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs Kiteworks comparison

"The solution offers good data recovery."

"The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."

"Being able to have the S3 files as storage is most valuable. We can use S3 as storage instead of an SFTP server or a machine."

"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."

"Scalability is impressive."

"The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty."

"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."

"The most valuable aspect of Kiteworks is undoubtedly the private content network. This feature is particularly beneficial for us. Furthermore, it serves as a centralized platform that enables us to track and manage our information exchange."

"I can identify from which region our users are uploading or downloading files."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."

"I like Kiteworks or Accellion because it's continuously upgraded. I also know that it probably works with a lot of clients."

"The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled."

"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."

"Could be more automated, particularly for file transfers."

"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."

"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."

"The one feature, which I have also requested directly to Kiteworks, is to have a scheduled upgrade function. Currently, one of my engineers logs in after hours for the upgrade. We're a hospital, and we're 24/7, but the primary users are seven to five. So, we log in the early evening just to push a button to tell it to do the update. It would be nice if that could be very easily scheduled."

"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."

"There are always issues when there are bugs or upgrades. The challenge with upgrading is getting more storage from the customer. Every time we have a new version, it requires additional storage. This means that the customer would need to procure more storage for their server, which they don't like because it means additional cost to them. So, I think my request would be that the version upgrades don't require any significant storage requirement."

"Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss."

"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."

"I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful."

"It's $249 per month per instance. It's not great; it's pretty pricey. We've got multiple users on that one instance. If we had to build it by hand, we would win on cost there, but obviously, there is effort and time. In terms of the additional costs, they do have some specific pricing, but for our use case, we don't end up going over $249. They do specify in their pricing what they're charging for."

"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."

"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."

"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."

"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."

"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."