We performed a comparison between Camunda and OpenText AppWorks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The flexibility is great."
"The BPMN diagram is valuable. For our use case of transferring money from one account to another, the connections have to be done in the traditional financial ways. There are a lot of unexpected errors and a lot of instability with this kind of system, and we are using Camunda in order to have clear flows. With BPMN, I can show a flow to my business partner, and the business team can easily understand what's going on. The technical team can understand what the implementation is, and we can model different errors and the process for recovering from these errors."
"The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part."
"We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."
"It is quite easy to build a simple process without any knowledge of programming."
"The product is stable."
"The architecture is good because it's a headless workflow. I can create my own frontend, and it's fully API-based."
"We like the idea of working with Cawemo because it enables us to keep on working, remotely or not. It allows us to collaborate between areas. It's easy to model and easy to use"
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"We really appreciate the process automation and how can you create human tasks as one of your processes."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"The monitoring aspect is highly valuable, as it offers an exceptional capability to track every minute of action performed by a business user in the global context."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"In terms of features, it meets my needs, but I would like Camunda to have an office in Brazil and provide training in Portuguese. They should provide regional support and training courses in Portuguese."
"Camunda Platform's customer support could be improved because their response is quite slow."
"Community support is basically what I'm looking for. Other than that, it is okay for now."
"In the future, I would definitely like to see the process administration (migration, audit, tracking) and process evaluation (optimize) features added to the community edition."
"They could provide more documentation regarding the integration of different programming languages."
"Like all BPM tools, they're very bad with proprietary UIs. In general, anyone who uses BPM tools should not expect to use their proprietary UI."
"The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform."
"The documentation could use improvement."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"AppWorks could be improved by including BPM simulation."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"The integration could improve."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 69 reviews while OpenText AppWorks is ranked 16th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while OpenText AppWorks is rated 7.8. 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 OpenText AppWorks writes "Automates processes like purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas OpenText AppWorks is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Appian, ServiceNow Now Platform, OutSystems and Mendix. See our Camunda vs. OpenText AppWorks report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.
