Canvas LMS vs TalentLMS comparison

"They have a more extensive support base in terms of infrastructure."

"The assessment tools in Canvas significantly contribute to educational outcomes by allowing instructors to create and manage assessments effectively."

"I used a lot of other systems in my IT career and Canvas LMS truly has everything that I would look for in an enterprise system."

"Canvas LMS is user-friendly. Its assessment tools help to find the weaknesses and strengths of students."

"Its easy adaptability to whatever form or methodology you are using to teach is valuable. It tends to be seamless, and it is very much a self-intuitive product. It requires almost no instruction, and you can be fully up to speed and ready to run on it. You can bring someone in who has never worked with any online learning or LMS system, and in a week's timeframe, they would almost be fully functional because Canvas is so simple to use."

"The integration with Zoom is a notable feature. It allows for seamless access to live class sessions directly from Canvas after authentication, enabling quick entry into Zoom calls. You can also schedule Zoom calls or private recordings directly within Canvas, making it convenient, especially for situations like self-recording exams. Additionally, Canvas excels in collaboration and discussion capabilities. Users can engage in discussions on various topics, and there's the option to create custom groups for more focused interactions. These groups provide a level of privacy and isolation from the broader class, which is a significant advantage."

"We have been using Canvas LMS, and overall, it has served our needs well for managing courses and general settings."

"It's easy to follow. It flows well, and it's easy to use."

"It is one of the least expensive learning management systems I've ever worked with."

"The setup for TalentLMS is easier than Cypher LMS."

"Notifications can to automated to notify users of assigned courses, remind users of outstanding courses, and email PDF certificates upon successful completion."

"In our working, we are encountering many challenges with Canvas LMS. One of the major area is their business model which is having a very different pricing structure. The structure is made in such a way that the license fee is needed to be paid for the complete year even if the student has been enrolled for a programme of short duration. This structure is not conducive with our needs and hence, in the past few years, been increasing our costs manifold. Along with this, Canva LMS also lacks many functionalities such as notifications and adaptive learning. There is a specific issue with the licensing model that affects us in continuous education. The inability to reuse a license for the same course in different terms hinders our cost efficiency. For instance, if a program runs from January to April, we are required to pay for the license twice within the same academic year. This contrasts with other platforms like Hyper, where reusing a license is possible, allowing us to use the same license multiple times in different terms. Along with the use, we are exploring the integration of artificial intelligence into our processes, and Canvas LMS falls short in this regard. While some platforms allow connections with external AI services, Canvas does not currently offer built-in artificial intelligence capabilities, a feature we find valuable for enhancing the learning experience."

"The learning curve is not steep, but it is intermediate."

"The high-tech interactivity with other software, like ArcGIS or RSA Archer, can be better. It is not as easily compatible with them. You can put apps in it that the students can then access, but the routing of apps through the Canvas system slows down functionality on the other types of products."

"There are a couple of areas that could be improved. Firstly, the discussion feature is not very interactive and can be slow to respond, making it less intuitive at the moment. This is an aspect that needs substantial improvement. Another point to consider is related to the cost of the LMS system. It's perceived as relatively expensive, which has led to discussions about transitioning away from Canvas, potentially to a more cost-effective alternative. This cost-related aspect is a significant factor to consider when implementing such a system."

"The product could be integrated with a talent management system."

"Integrating more AI capabilities for the product could enhance its functionality, particularly in automating repetitive tasks and personalizing learning experiences."

"It would be good to be able to do teleconferencing within the LMS."

"The solution could be upgraded and improved."

"Regarding improvement areas, when I upload animated training packs in Microsoft PowerPoint format, the animation and transitions are lost. This makes it static."

"The problem with TalentLMS is that it has some bugs. If you need to upload an image, then it will cause trouble. It is not actually stable."

"The built-in builder has some rather serious limitations."

"Canvas LMS is an affordable solution."

"The pricing of Canvas is satisfactory for my university. We have negotiated a good price, especially considering that we are a large university with twenty-six campuses across the country. Canvas offers a favorable pricing model for academic institutions, and the cost is reasonable. However, in continuous education, the challenge lies not in the price itself but in the business model. The requirement to pay for the entire year when our students may only use the license for a shorter duration creates challenges. The inability to adjust the licensing based on actual usage is a significant drawback for us, making the effective cost higher compared to other platforms like Hyper Learning"

"Canvas LMS is low-priced compared to other vendors."

"The platform can be expensive for smaller organizations with fewer students."

"You can't beat this solution for the price."