We performed a comparison between IBM ECM and IBM FileNet based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."The content management is all about you as you can make the same content for minimal purpose solutions applications."
"The scalability is a valuable feature, that we're able to display our documents to so many people."
"The vertical scalability, as we can use it across some of our applications."
"The tool is a very stable solution with high availability and no information leakage. It has built-in API integration on-site. You can integrate with other components and applications like SAP, Microsoft, Oracle, etc."
"There is a high degree of usability with this solution. It is highly compatible with our clients' and customers' work environments, making it easy to deploy and implement."
"The usability is really good. Our business users are pleased with it. They seem to get what they are looking for, and it's very efficient."
"It allows for multiple people to access content simultaneously."
"It is a user-friendly system and easy to manage for anyone with basic knowledge."
"It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."
"The product is very stable."
"The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions."
"The most valuable feature for me is the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected."
"I think it's already getting away from Java applets. A lot of our users struggle with keeping up to date with Java versioning, so a lot of the functions they're doing, like printing, emailing, and even some of the viewing, they're struggling with."
"I would recommend not going with ECM 8 and going with FileNet instead. It seems like that is the future of the lower-volume repository. It seems like they are moving away from ECM 8.5 so I think we're going to have some challenges coming up, getting off of that technology."
"I would like to see seamless application integration."
"The development platform is not local. For example, you need 100 days in IBM, whereas other platforms, like ServiceNow, need only 20 days."
"I think it's to the point where there are probably too many features. Every software, as it matures and graduates, grows the list of features. What many of our customers express is that it's just too complicated. They're using maybe five or ten percent of the features but they're having to pay for 100 percent. There is room for improvement in terms of simplifying it."
"One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture."
"I would like to have easier steps for setting up the application. They should have an easy one step process for the whole installation. Right now, you have to know the application well to set it up and have IT expertise."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis."
"Developers like us have an upgraded interface. That interface does not work in the process that we have today. It hangs and is not user-friendly."
"I'd like to see more cognitive. That's obviously where all of our world is going. I think if we can have more of those types of features and functions as a core, out of the box, that would be very helpful for us and our space."
"The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities."
IBM ECM is ranked 13th in Enterprise Content Management with 16 reviews while IBM FileNet is ranked 5th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews. IBM ECM is rated 8.0, while IBM FileNet is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM ECM writes "Datacap provides granularity and any level of customization. Solution development and delivery time needs to be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". IBM ECM is most compared with Mobius Content Services Platform, OpenText Documentum, SAP Extended Enterprise Content Management, Alfresco and Hyland OnBase, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM, Alfresco and Hyland OnBase.
See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management 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.
