Oracle WebCenter Reviews

We primarily use this solution as we use multiple Oracle products, and it's easy to integrate it in with the others.

The solution offers a lot of features that are valuable. The security of it is very good.

Integration within the solution is very good.

The solution should be offered in Persian. Right now, our version is in English, and there's a bit of a language barrier between the users and the product.

It would be helpful if Oracle could create some sort of facility to customize templates easily if users use JavaScript or other internal tools.

I've been using the solution for two years.

The stability of the solution is good. We haven't had any problems in two years. There hasn't been any crashes or anything of that nature.

The solution is completely scalable and one of the best Oracle tools in my opinion. You can change the requirements easily. We have about 1,500 users on the solution currently.

Unfortunately, due to sanctions in Iran, we can't access technical support.

We did use SharePoint many years ago and have since switched over to Oracle. As we use many Oracle products, it was easy to integrate it into everything.

In our company we use clustering, so the setup is very, very complex. We need to use the WebLogic sharing application server. I do have fairly good experience using the solution, so I'm able to manage it fine.

We use the tool for free in our country; the licensing policy is not accessible in Iran.

Due to the sanctions within our country, we only have access to on-premises deployment models.

The system is very customizable and we have plans to integrate it with our finance and inventory systems as well.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I believe the solution is one of the best tools in the world.

The product is a standard document management solution, so there are no special features to point to. 

It's a very scalable solution and the performance is pretty good. The scalability, in my opinion, is the biggest advantage.

There are many document management systems that offer pretty much the same functionalities but at a lower price. The product as such is pretty good. However, the pricing is not comparable. They need to adjust their pricing to be more competitive on the market.

The solution is stable.

The solution is extremely scalable.

Technical support has been pretty good. We're satisfied with it.

The initial setup is complex. Since Oracle has re-written their solution in order to place it on their public server, the setup itself has grown more complex. This is necessary, however, the change has required more steps in order to set up the product as well more steps in order to make it perform, and there's more things to manually set up. 

The pricing is very high. You can get a similar solution for free. If you compare it and other products side by side, you would not buy Oracle.

In terms of advice I would give to others considering implementing the solution, I'd say if they have the Oracle stack, they should use the solution. If they have other technology stacks, I would search for solutions that offer a better price.

The solution works great. Feature-wise, it's a very complete solution.

I'd rate the solution overall eight out of ten, but if I was just rating it for price, I would rate it at about four or five out of ten, simply because I find it so expensive.

This solution is a document management system that is supported on a light business process management platform.

The content supports phots, sites, and everything.

There are no issues at all in terms of documents, which can be used for anything related to purchasing processes or implementing processes.

This is not just a document management system. It also includes a workflow process engine, business process management, and automation for business cases.

Oracle integrates well with other products to cover Big Data. This includes a component that can be used for artificial intelligence and business analytics. You can connect with a full suite for whatever is needed to manage a business.

This solution needs to support translation into the Arabic language. It is needed for the forms, as well as the tabs in the software itself.

This is a reliable solution that depends on the Oracle database, which is a very well known and very trusted database around the world. It is considered to be the best database when compared to Microsoft SQL, IBM Db2, or Sybase HANA. 

The underlying infrastructure is very durable.

This platform is very scalable.

The price of this solution is considered to be high; however, when speaking with Oracle, it is possible to get discounts of up to sixty percent. Other providers will never give a discount for more than twenty percent, so, in this case, Oracle gets much cheaper.

When you begin speaking with Oracle and you discuss purchasing this solution, they will offer discounts that make it cheaper than other products such as OpenText Documentum, or EverSuite ECM.

Every day, Oracle is acquiring new products or developing them with their own research and development team. Definitely, there is much development going on.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is to first be sure about the product that they need. The second thing is to be sure about the roadmap that they want behind this product. Next, I suggest going with the best practices offered by Oracle because they are very well experienced in this field, and they offer it to help cut implementation time.

I think that people should definitely go with cloud-based solutions such as Oracle Fusion or the Oracle cloud machines. This gives a company all of its applications and required software on the cloud, but at the same time, it is on-premises.

Overall, this is a very good solution and other than the support for the Arabic translation, I cannot think of additional features that I would like at the moment. That said, nothing is perfect.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our main reason for using this solution is to manage documents. In my company, we have a lot of documents. We can search for these documents easily depending on content and title. I found the solution able to handle our large volume of documents and make them accessible. The product gave me a lot of options for storage and search.

It is easier to share and search for company content.

The most important feature is that it is possible to relate all of the databases that we use. I use Oracle databases like SAP Logic, I use BI Publisher, I use Epic, and my company uses a lot of other Oracle applications. WebCenter content gives me easy access, connection and compatibility with all of the Oracle products. The availability and security are very important to me and our operations.

The best feature for me is that all people can see the data for WebCenter content that I make content available to public or groups and they can use the data to make graphs and analysis. They can access things in my Google Drive. There is no backlash in the long-term with performance — not on the server or on the desktop. I like the availability and access features a lot.

WebCenter content access has a lot of options and flexibility. At this time, I only see one problem: in the sub-content and channels surrounding Windows 10.

It only functions with Windows 7 and Windows 8. All of the operating systems in my company are up-to-date and we are using Windows 10. For whatever reason, you can't use the Oracle content on these platforms at all. This lapse is very bad for my company because I can't change the version of Word and downgrade. Maybe it is just a technical problem. 

But it is a lot of my problem with this solution currently.

I have not seen any blocks, glitches, or crashes. I have not heard anything about anyone having trouble with that type of thing. I think that the stability is pretty good.

This product is very good for scaling. It is easy to expand this solution. It may seem like an exaggeration, but it is exciting. I think it is the best solution for all of the problems you might have with document storage. If you want to deploy it for your company, I would start in one department. After I see that it is successful, I would start expanding usage to the rest of the company.

Oracle WebCenter is the best when it comes to delivering technical support. I think that, in general, Oracle is the best company for supporting its products and solutions.

We started using the product on the cloud but a lot of the product's features were not accessible that way, so we switched to on-premises. We switched to gain full access to the product's features. That was important to us.

The setup is really very complex. I bought the Oracle solution for learning and used it with an Oracle partner to solve the problem in implementation. Deployment took about three months. So it was complex to start up, but it provides excellent services.

In the first installation, I used an Oracle partner to help deploy one server. That was a great help. For the other servers, we deployed them ourselves without assistance.

I love the solution. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product absolutely as a ten.

We use it to build our company intranet, including news, organizational structure, product introductions, process documents, etc.

WebCenter does not meet our requirements. 

The WebCenter Content is its most valuable feature. After we update a document in WebCenter Content, it can be update automatically in our intranet (based on WebCenter).

• Its functions need more stability. 
• The user interface needs to be improved.
• I would like them to add more Web 2.0 features.  

Some web 2.0 characteristics are unstable and can't be easily used, such as portals.

The price needs to be lowered.

The business user has the capability to update content, look, and feel.

Each department wanted their unique content targeting.

I would like to see better performance.

We have used this solution for two years.

There were no deployment issues.

There were performance issues.

There were no scalability issues.

Customer service was fair.

I would give technical support a rating of 7/10.

We evaluated Sun ONE Portal Server.

The setup was very complicated.

We implemented via the vendor, and I would give them a rating of 8/10.

The most valuable features to me are the ability to create contents with the interface, such as creating database tables. The product's JSP APIs and REST APIs are also very useful.

Rules for contents personalization, workflows, publishing content, and the satellite cache all have room for improvement!

I have been using Oracle WebCenter Sites for 10 years.

In a cluster environment, we had stability issues with the satellite cache.

We did not have any scalability issues.

The technical support we received was excellent.

I used a free OWS solution.

The installation in a WebLogic environment is straightforward.

It is an expensive product. I would try to negotiate a better price.

Before choosing Oracle WebCenter Sites, we evaluated Vignette and some free products.

When you start a project, you should consult early on with your developers.

• Worklist
• Process Spaces
• Discussion Board
• Document Viewer
• Blogs
• Wiki

These features are great components in WebCenter Collaboration for presenting various middleware and ECM functionalities to the end user in a single portal application. This also gives a seamless experience with single sign-on capabilities.

It has helped us internally to collaborate better.

UCX needs improvement and better APIs for integration with custom and third-party apps; better layouts for mobility.

I have used it for over six years now. (I started with 11g.)

It can get slower under load.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Technical support is 8/10.

I have previously used IBM WebSphere portal.

Initial setup was simple for standard things, but for customisation and third-party integration, it can get cumbersome.

Pricing and licensing depends upon the other FMW products you use along with this.

We are an Oracle gold partner, so we didn't evaluate other products.

It has excellent features and possibilities for collaboration; you will need skilled resources, though.

• Java-based content management
• Runtime customizations

The main feature and idea of dynamically creating navigation, pages and portals are overall good and very valuable. Also, adjusting portal design (skinning) is quite easy. Then there is the WebCenter Content Repository, where you register the file system folder and can manage files of the portal. That feature is quite good too.

Defining permissions and access rights is also quite straightforward, as you can use JavaServer Faces expressions.

We developed a portal using the framework. Not all of the features were used though.

Some parts of the product seemed to be unstable; various exceptions which lead to reaching out for Oracle support. Using WSRP (Web service remote portlets) seems to be messy in terms of application deployment.

I have used it for three years.

I certainly encountered stability issues;

Not sure if they are exactly WebCenter related, but sometimes unknown exceptions were raised on runtime or deployment that could be resolved by restarting the server.

Regarding WSRP: Web Service for remote portlets feature generates metadata
files during deployment so that WSRP portlet can be used.

However, this leads to a situation where the application cannot be packaged and customized via deployment plan, rather it needs to be packaged during deployment.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Technical support is decent, but slow.

No content management solutions were used before.

Initial setup was more or less straightforward, as the official IDE - JDeveloper was used.

I was not the one to make decisions. One competitor to consider would be Liferay Portal, for instance.

Become as familiar with the product and features as possible before using it. Custom solutions might be difficult to implement.

The most valuable feature for us has been the ability to use it for planning our API, work orders, and PO stored in just one instance. It's been difficult integrating it for our applications, but we've been able to go live with PO and it's working.

It's helped us in a couple of areas. First, it's increased our efficiency, and second, it's eliminated human errors. Previously, requests were sent out on paper, although a certain percentage of them had to be manually entered into the system. This resulted in lots of errors and it required a lot of labor. With WebCenter, we can scan and capture all the information correctly, which is then imported into the system automatically. This means that there's no human interaction between WebCenter and the system, so it eliminates labor and headcount, and increases efficiency.

We are OK with WebCenter, but we're not very happy with the API because when the devices come from the customer, they're not able to scan and read properly. We're working with Oracle on this issue right now.

We've gone live with WebCenter, but we haven't been able to use the API, so we're still in the process of implementing that. We're having a hard time and feel that Oracle could offer us more support to resolve the issue.

We have a lot of pain with instabilities and are not getting enough support from Oracle.

We are in the learning stages, so we don't know much about WebCenter in terms of its ability to scale for our needs.

We are having a hard time getting proper support to help us complete our implementation.

It seems complex for us, especially since we aren't getting enough support from Oracle for the setup.

We're setting it up with our in-house team and we're trying to get Oracle to provide us with support in doing so.