We performed a comparison between Nintex Process Platform and Rocket Zena based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It provides data accuracy with fewer failures."
"Allows us to provide desktop/laptop and mobile solutions to our users."
"The solution has helped us to automate our business processes, our approval systems, and automation for quickly developing on SharePoint on-prem and SharePoint online."
"K2 is reasonably priced."
"It has a lot of features for creating and managing workflows, as well as for integrating with other applications. Nintex offers features, particularly to ensure a user-friendly experience."
"It leverages the out-of-the-box SharePoint back-end. This means that you don’t need to install or deploy additional infrastructure to support Nintex Workflow, unlike some of its competitors."
"I think the initial setup is fine."
"The technical support is very good."
"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."
"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."
"I have used other tools with similar capabilities; it's the ease of use."
"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."
"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."
"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."
"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."
"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."
"Unfortunately, Nintex Workflow is not that stable. We are looking at shifting to another tool."
"The security features for this solution need to be improved."
"Currently, a notable challenge lies in the alignment of user experiences across the eight or nine applications within the suite. Transitioning between applications can be somewhat cumbersome due to varying user interfaces. However, the provider is actively addressing this concern by consistently rolling out updates every four to five months, aimed at harmonizing and streamlining the interfaces. This ongoing effort is expected to enhance the user experience over time. In terms of functionality and features, the platform stands out, offering flexibility with the option for both on-premises and cloud deployment. This flexibility extends to the RPA tool, providing clients with choices tailored to their preferences. An advantage lies in the shared security and data infrastructure across the toolset, facilitating smooth data transfer between applications. This contrasts with experiences with Oracle, where data transfer may involve complexities such as the need for intermediary file formats like TXL or SCZ."
"It is very flexible because you can design your own main forms, but if there were some templates according to your market, it would be more useful for a new customer. That would make K2 more user friendly and easier to use."
"At times, issues arise in certain scenarios. In such cases, the versioning can become quite difficult. There may be no other way but to restart the entire process or rectify it at that point."
"Nintex seems to be very server intensive. It is one of the reasons that we are moving to a different product on the SharePoint 2016 platform."
"User interface could use some improvement. Perhaps integration with Visual Studio or SharePoint Designer would be useful."
"The solution does not integrate with many platforms."
"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."
"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."
"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."
"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."
"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."
"The documentation has room for improvement."
"In the web interface, it stacks the tasks across the top, and they accumulate until you close or clean those out. That seems a little cumbersome. You must right-click and close all tabs constantly to keep the console clean and manage your views."
"In the next release, I would like to have an alert feature to indicate when an agent is down. Rocket Zena is not capable of sending alerts that the agent is down. As of now, you have manually monitor to see when the agent is down."
Nintex Process Platform is ranked 10th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews while Rocket Zena is ranked 12th in Workload Automation with 9 reviews. Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0, while Rocket Zena is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rocket Zena writes "A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support". Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Appian, Pega BPM and Bizagi, whereas Rocket Zena is most compared with Control-M, Rocket Zeke, IBM Workload Automation, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch by Redwood. See our Nintex Process Platform vs. Rocket Zena report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload 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.
