We performed a comparison between Camunda and Make 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."We have the ability to modify the product if we need to, and that comes in handy whenever we need to add new functionality and features."
"The flexibility characteristic in a BPMS, through BPMN and DMN, is undoubtedly the most interesting feature for our business."
"Overall, the solution has been very solid."
"It is very user-friendly compared to IBM BPM. It's much simpler – it's more streamlined. That means even non-technical departments can use it."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"It's user friendly, much better than most tools I have seen."
"The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"The most valuable features of Make are the additional options when compared to other similar solutions. For example, with Google my business, you can only do certain things with Zapier, whereas with Make, you can do a little bit more."
"There should be a multi-tenant solution for the platform where it supports multiple organizations on one platform instead of having to spin up multiple clusters for each organization. There should be an easy way to integrate different departments into one platform without having to operate multiple platforms. The operations should be easier with the enterprise solution. It should not create more overhead for the operations people."
"Would be helpful if there were additional out-of-the-box activities."
"The product does not have a dictionary."
"If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map."
"Camunda could be improved by making it easier to modify a process. You can program it to follow a process, but it is difficult to modify the process when the application is in use. It could also be improved by making it easier to use the visual platform without needing to be informed on that. Sometimes, we programmers haven't used it in the past, and it's a bit difficult to learn it."
"As we experienced some difficulties in the beginning, deployment took almost a month."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."
"Make could improve the ease of use, it can be more complicated than other solutions. There are a lot of elements that are more technical than in other solutions."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Process Automation with 68 reviews while Make is ranked 26th in Process Automation with 2 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while Make is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Make writes "An affordable cloud solution for automation and data manipulation". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas Make is most compared with . See our Camunda vs. Make 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.
