We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and Microsoft .NET Framework based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I liked its robustness the most. It was a very robust platform in my experience. It seemed like a very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users and hammering at the system."
"We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"Provides the power to understand and automate processes."
"The designer feature, compared to other solutions is easy to use."
"Its dashboard is easy to use and very good. It allows us to customize."
"The most valuable features are the integration capabilities - BPM can connect with almost any legacy or advanced system."
"IBM BPM is equipped with all the functionalities which are needed for building BPM enterprise-level applications."
"Some of the features that I like the most are team management and process performance. They are both very useful and very powerful with regard to the workflow."
"Firstly, I appreciate the decision to use Microsoft .NET Framework. I find it to be an excellent language, with a history rooted in providing an alternative to Java, albeit with initial challenges. It is gaining popularity and may be voted the most desirable programming language. What I particularly like about .NET is its language efficiency. While C# is the primary language, the platform also supports others, catering to those inclined towards functional programming. Although I started with Shell, I'm still grasping the concept of functional programming. Despite initial reservations about object-oriented programming, I acknowledge its advantages. .NET is a safer option, and despite criticisms, it has evolved over the years. One notable aspect is .NET's transition to an open platform in recent years, distancing itself from being exclusive to Microsoft engineers. I appreciate the versatility of .NET, enabling code production for a wide range of platforms, presenting a strong competition to Java. It allows targeting practically any physical platform, showcasing its flexibility. These qualities contribute to my positive view of .NET, totaling thirteen aspects that I find appealing."
"The solution is easy to use if the user is a developer or some technical person."
"The most valuable thing about Microsoft .NET Framework is that it is an enterprise-grade language and platform."
"The .NET Framework is a very good framework. It does what I need it to do."
"In my opinion, the best thing about Microsoft .NET is the fully featured framework. It provides most of the things which a normal developer requires of any application out of the box."
"Microsoft Platform is the only viable solution when I wish to do something that is not supposed to be cross-platform."
"Ease of use, the richness of the libraries and basically very good development tools."
"In-built refactoring and .Net profilers are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The people working on the front desk are having some problem with managing the documentation. For instance, they get a picture, and if the picture comes rotated 90 degrees, together with a picture that is not rotated, they have some problems dealing with that, technically. There are some minor aspects that on the usability side that are still lacking. That has to do with FileNet, too, I'm talking about the suite together."
"The debugging needs improvement. There is some confusion surrounding the debugging."
"The user experience, while it has improved, should continue to improve."
"The integration could be improved."
"I'd like the tool to be more flexible."
"One of the things that we are looking at is cognitive learning. IBM has another product called IBM RPA, I think, which is doing some of that stuff. We would like to see more of that with respect to cognitive learning and AI put back into the process engine to help."
"UI is an area with a shortcoming that needs improvement."
"This is technology, and there's always room for improvement. It would be better to have a single solution. Trying to have an overview in terms of this solution brings together the concepts of BPM processes, customer journeys, and an automation part for KPIs. All of this working together and coming up with a single solution with privacy is more commercial than anything else."
"This solution is best used with some training."
"If Microsoft would provide a monthly subscription at a cost that a developer can afford then it would be really helpful."
"They should have more training materials available that are specific to .NET. We spend a lot of money training our engineers."
"Improvements are needed in .NET development, particularly in a backend scenario."
"Needs stronger security with respect to cloud issues."
"I would like more web integration."
"One thing that could be improved is the tooling and IDE for .NET in non-Windows environments like Mac."
"The solution is difficult to learn if someone is learning it for the first time."
IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, Apache Web Server, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and IBM DataPower Gateway. See our IBM BPM vs. Microsoft .NET Framework report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.