Box vs. OpenText Documentum

Very likely to use it. It gives you the comfort that all the files are being stored in [the] same places from different team members. It is easy to organize in folders and also very useful by adding time stamps. [With] an easy setup u can have and box extension installed on your laptop and use it directly. So you can sync files easily.

What are the document volume, the throughput - currently and expected in year, 3 years etc.? Is the company doing content management on international level, where access from multiple locations is needed - then Documentum can be good investment. What ECM system will be used for - document storage, document lifecycle or retention? Or all of the above? - Documentum works very well if all 3 items are combined, yet for storage there must be cheaper and more easily adaptable solutions available.

• The main feature that I like the most in Box is that it makes collaboration seamless, workers can easily check the documents any time and make changes according to the needs.
• Box manages and backs up all of your files on its cloud servers, and provides a very nice interface for creating, viewing, editing, and collaborating on the most commonly used file types (PDF, XLS, DOC, etc.).
• Over the past few years, Box has built on top of its basic cloud storage management with a host of other tools, such as workflows, AI, monitoring, and analytics.
• It is helping us to make good connections with clients and our workers themselves as to its syncing and viewing feature to all is very much helpful and easy to go.

Incentivized

• It's good at integration with external systems through standard industry supported APIs, including but not limited to web services integration and file system integration.
• Good support from major up and downstream technologies such as image capturing and back end ERP, Database, and HR.
• Highly configurable.
• Very fast searching capabilities.
• Highly scalable.

Incentivized

• The graphic design of the dashboard should be simpler and more tangible that can be changed to the liking of the Admin.
• Sometimes there are some syncing issues in the background.
• The product has very limited functionality in some areas which could be a bit frustrating at times.

Incentivized

• Expense. If Documentum costs less it would penetrate more markets. This is often the reason a lighter weight solution is chosen.
• Web Publishing. Documentum is not a great solution for replacing CMSs like SiteCore or Drupal. Probably better as an archiving target for parallel publishing to both web and Documentum. Documentum is also not a web hosting solution like some other systems, it is possible to try and consume directly from the repository in real time but it is better to push web content out and consume from another platform.
• Development. The price of broad functionality is complexity. Arguably, Documentum drank the kool-aid and tried to become like other enterprise solutions by adapting Java, Windows, etc. in the late '90s and it made them slower, more complex in design, and less stable. They recovered from that but it still requires developers with a few years of experience in Documentum to safely develop in Documentum. The issue is not knowing Java but knowing what to do or not do in an ECM system. This is even more important in regulated ECM/RM systems.

Incentivized

As I've stated Box is very easy to use and to set up. The documentation provided by Box is easy to follow and the interface is designed in a way that makes sense. With only a few limitations on the administrator side the system is fully capable to get the job done for our company

Stability is a key factor as well as its flexibility. Also, any organization that deploys Documentum will have made a significant investment in terms of time and money, so not renewing its commitment can come with a significant cost. That said, the decision to deploy Documentum initially should come only after extensive evaluation, knowing that once deployed it will likely remain the platform of choice.

Incentivized

I think I can only describe it as excellent. All aspects of Box work without problem, quickly and efficiently. The file upload and download systems are quite fast, the process of access from different platforms is carried out without problems, so far no document has been generated in conflicts or unexpected copies, or any type of error.

Incentivized

Yeah, it's always worked, I've never had any kind of connection issues, the only issues I've had it I've been on our end when the Internet hasn't worked.

Incentivized

It's performance is great. Everything loads as soon as you open a page. The same goes for the local file application, if is just like going through folders on a native "My Computer" or "Finder" folder. The integration into other softwares is also fantastic, as Box keeps them all running smoothly and quickly

Incentivized

I found their support community lacking in clarity when I experienced a login issue. The error messaging was poor on my Box Sync application. I did not reach out to support staff for help, instead, I reasoned that I should try downloading the Box Sync application again and reinstall it. That fixed my issue, thankfully. I think a less computer-savvy user would've been much more frustrated.

Incentivized

Support is better than with ECM, but could use some improvement.

Incentivized

The in person training was done in house and I helped with the training, people seem to respond well.

Incentivized

The documentation is good. Since Box is a popular service, there were also a number of YouTube videos and other sources that were helpful as we were considering the product and planning for deployment. Also, the ability to try the free version helped to prepare us.

Be careful with settings. It is easy to get overwhelmed with updates. For example, you don’t want to be updated when doing historical data uploads. I recommend taking off notifications initially and then turn on post you have done your historical data upload.

I slightly prefer Box over Dropbox, especially if I need to store and manage thousands of files. Dropbox online file management was not as easy to navigate as Box. However, Dropbox also has a similar cloud sync feature that worked similar to Box and was pretty comparable to the Box feature. The main reason my team switched to Box was because our organization provided it at no cost to our team, whereas for Dropbox we had to use our own research grant money to pay for it.

Subjective but here's how I see it: Heavy duty (in order of how much they can do and how much they can handle): 1)Documentum, 2)FileNet 3)OpenText Middle duty: 1)WCC-WebCenter Content, 2)Alfresco, 3)M-Files (3rd b/c it is Windows only), 4)Nuxeo (only b/c of its newish approach that may lead somewhere) Light duty: 1) BOX (not an ECM but it says it is), 2) EFSS (pick your poison, BOX is an enhanced EFSS), 3) CMSs (some have some ECM capability, none have much)

Incentivized

It's great, as we put more files on there it's done very well.

Incentivized

• Box has been an only positive experience. It provides a seamless way for me and my team to collaborate on documents in such a way where we're not sending the document back/forth via email. It's a huge timesaver.
• Box reduces the risk of sharing a sensitive document to the wrong person via email.
• Box has provided a platform where my team can share notes in meetings - this has helped streamline and organize our meetings. Our meetings are more productive and actionable.

Incentivized

• After this product, the client is able to manage content security and due to it, the client is able to use the business process, and this really reduces effort and increases the profit in business.
• It provides integration with SAP easily which really helps the client to manage this effectively and with minimum effort system is ready to use.
• Also searching, automated flows also create a bigger impact and reduce a lot manual effort.

Incentivized