We performed a comparison between CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] and Nintex Process Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"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."
"The setup is easy."
"It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience."
"It can scale well."
"NWC forms could be better. Also, the ability to build workflows that are not dependent on SharePoint is very desirable. The forms feature just isn’t as functional as the forms for SharePoint."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that it's no code, it's very flexible, and it's easy to design."
"It is very easy to create and deploy. I am very happy with how user-friendly Nintex Workflow is."
"It is very easy to use."
"I like the feature of getting an email for a workflow error, then I do not have to go through every instance."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"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."
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"We would like to have access to an on-premises solution. In our country, we have a relationship with Central Bank of Egypt, which do noes not allow cloud solutions to be used. They should offer an on-prem solution with a flexible price license."
"Currently, it's taking quite some time to deploy a package, it needs improvement"
"Bring all features available from the on-premise product into the cloud version and the workflow error reporting."
"The license pricing is too high currently for Nintex Workflow."
"It's very tedious to manage."
"At times, issues arise in certain scenarios. In such cases, the versioning can become quite difficult. There may be no other way but to restart the entire process or rectify it at that point."
"Nintex seems to be very server intensive. It is one of the reasons that we are moving to a different product on the SharePoint 2016 platform."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 8th in Process Automation with 21 reviews. CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Appian, Pega BPM and SAP Signavio Process Manager.
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.