We performed a comparison between Box and OpenText Content Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Content Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Simple file sharing and sync for internal and external customers."
"The interface is very good."
"Box is extremely stable, they have not been hacked or lost any data in the past seventeen years. I am very impressed with it."
"We've never had a penetration. We've never had a security issue that their support didn't solve. We love their audit trail. We can know exactly when a collaborator opens. We love how you can define a collaborator."
"It is really easy to load files to and from this solution."
"You can upload your bin, upload your files quickly, and download your files quickly. It provides a lot of other alternatives."
"Using Box for cloud storage allows us to focus on the service and maintaining infrastructure."
"It is a very user-friendly product."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"Working on documents in real-time is sometimes faulty and could be improved."
"Improvements in speed - Box's high level of security impacts performance, especially when compared with other similar services."
"I recommend doing the trial first, because it's not cheap ware. It's not overly expensive, but it's not cheap ware, and enterprise has a minimum number of users."
"They could integrate better with other platforms."
"It could be cheaper."
"I find their API to be quite complex and it could be more straightforward."
"The UI should be faster. Sometimes it lags when switching between documents."
"Better integration with other solutions is needed."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
Box is ranked 4th in Enterprise Content Management with 37 reviews while OpenText Content Manager is ranked 10th in Enterprise Content Management with 21 reviews. Box is rated 8.4, while OpenText Content Manager is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Box writes "Used for data storage and data collaboration, but its data security could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Content Manager writes "A document management system that integrates well with SAP, Salesforce and Oracle ". Box is most compared with SharePoint, Microsoft OneDrive, Citrix ShareFile, Office 365 and Egnyte, whereas OpenText Content Manager is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Extended ECM, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet and Objective ECM. See our Box vs. OpenText Content Manager report.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors and best Document Management Software 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.
