Adobe Web Experience Management Reviews

Adobe Web Experience Management is mainly used for static websites where frequent content changes occur. The tool is utilized in parallel for websites where content is configured in one place and consumed across other channels, such as mobile applications or other platforms. This particular use case is the primary focus, as the tool is best suited for content offering purposes, especially where maximum content offering is required.

The feature I found most valuable in this solution is content as a service, which allows content to be consumed differently. Initially, the solution could not expose content, but now it supports frameworks such as React and Angular. This additional feature with single-page applications enables better consumption of content, which is particularly beneficial in a hybrid mode where some content is static while other content is dynamic.

The new cloud solution from Adobe Web Experience Management has better scalability compared to the older on-premises version. I would say this is a significant advantage in terms of scalability.

There is room for improvement in Adobe Web Experience Management, particularly concerning single-page applications. It has certain aspects that need improvement regarding content exposure. While content as a service has been introduced, there are some difficulties when implementing it, as customizations are required, which are not out-of-the-box features or APIs provided. Additionally, the deployment strategy employed for Adobe Cloud Services has room for improvement, particularly in the time taken for deployment and debugging. Developers find it challenging to debug issues in the environment, as previous on-premises versions provided more visibility. This aspect definitely needs improvement.

Normally, for the cloud, deployment takes around thirty to forty-five minutes, but I have seen situations where it takes more than one hour, sometimes even one and a half hours. For the production environment, at least half an hour may be acceptable, but one and a half hours is not acceptable. This contrasts with the on-premises version, which has a different architecture for deployment. This should be improved, and they need to look into it because one and a half hours for deployment is too much.

I have been working with this solution for around nine to ten years.

Adobe Web Experience Management is stable and quite resilient. From a stability point of view, I would rate it around seven to eight.

I would rate scalability an eight. The reason I would not provide a perfect ten is that even if it is scalable, certain challenges may still arise. Based on my knowledge, I can go for around eight.

I have experience with technical support for Adobe Web Experience Management, though I have not worked in direct product support. However, I have seen interactions regarding support products, and they interact and attempt to provide solutions for raised tickets. While it takes more time than expected for priority-wise issues, Adobe support gets involved and attempts to help. Overall, I would say it is average; not too good, but not too bad either, as sometimes tickets get reassigned, leading to longer wait times.

I would rate technical support around six.

For those looking into using Adobe Web Experience Management, I find that each tool has its own capabilities, but I find that this particular tool offers a better experience compared to others.

Overall, I find this product to be good because it is a hundred percent Java-based tool. Additionally, it supports the integration of other frameworks seamlessly, providing visibility for developers. The bundles and core parts of this solution are better. There are some limitations, but the feasibility for developers is considerable, allowing for the integration of different frameworks comfortably. I would rate this product a seven overall.

My main use case for Adobe Web Experience Management is for static websites. Recently, it has been started for certain other channels for the headless content one, and it is being used.

Functionality-wise, the part which is mostly related to static websites is essential, but the other part is the integrations with Adobe's other products, which Adobe has provided. These are the few things I can call out. Recently, most clients are also trying to move to headless one, and Adobe is really working hard to keep those clients and introduce this headless support as well.

For the personalization piece, it is there in Adobe Web Experience Management. As I said, the integration with Analytics and Target is in place, and most of the clients are also using that feature.

The effectiveness of Adobe Web Experience Management, as I have seen, mainly depends on the business, but from the analytics data collected for campaign purposes, they are targeting certain audiences using the Target part.

The setup process for Adobe Web Experience Management is simple.

Regarding AI-driven analytics in Adobe Web Experience Management, AI analytics is not yet used; however, since recently there was a push at a global market level to move to AI part, Adobe also introduced certain things, but currently, I have not used it.

From an integration point of view, as I said, for Adobe suite products, Adobe provided it. However, mainly for the cloud one, Adobe Web Experience Management on-premises has certain restrictions from a compliance point of view. Adobe has hosted it in their environment, and now I think most clients are moving to AMS as well. However, when it comes to third-party integrations, there are certain restrictions, especially in finance organizations. For the retail sector, support provided by Adobe is pretty good but clients are still restricting themselves from moving to the cloud due to compliance issues, which I believe is not because of Adobe Web Experience Management but rather because of the cloud structure itself.

Improvement-wise, I think Adobe Web Experience Management site-wise is fine, but mainly for the cloud one, it is growing. However, I have observed that certain forms need improvement, and if Adobe has any offering for clients needing private cloud solutions, that would be great. I have seen clients restricting themselves from moving to the cloud, and it depends on Adobe's awareness of this issue through surveys they may have conducted.

I don't think I would suggest any additional features for Adobe Web Experience Management because case by case, the requirements may vary. Adobe has tried to provide the vanilla features that are required.

I have been working with Adobe Web Experience Management for more than seven to eight years.

For stability, I would rate Adobe Web Experience Management around six to seven.

Scalability-wise, I think it is pretty much good. I would rate it more than seven, approximately eight.

From a technical support point of view for Adobe Web Experience Management, I would rate them a five. They attempt to resolve issues promptly, but response times can vary. Sometimes clients need to wait at least a month for more complex queries related to product parts as the support team has to consult with the core product team, which can take time.

Positive

Adobe Web Experience Management is a little bit costlier compared to other products. I would rate the pricing for Adobe Web Experience Management as a high price, probably around three or four, indicating it could be cheaper compared to other products.

The main competitor for Adobe Web Experience Management currently is Tridion. I would also say Drupal is another CMS, but I don't consider it a direct competitor.

The user interface of Adobe Web Experience Management is user-friendly, and that is the main reason most clients are moving to Adobe from other vendors. I would rate this review an eight overall.

We use it to help our clients in digitalizing their marketing platform.

In terms of its deployment and version, most of our clients are on Adobe Cloud, and Adobe keeps on upgrading the version automatically. We also have a couple of on-premise deployments with version 6.5, where clients manage their own ecosystem. Most of the time, clients do not want to have their lower environments, such as non-production environments, development instances, and QA instances on the cloud because multiple teams are using them, and it is costly to have all lower environments on the cloud. They want to control the cost. Therefore, they follow a hybrid model where non-production environments are on-premise and higher environments, such as staging, previewing, and production, are on the cloud.

Nowadays, you have a lot of campaigns coming up during each festival, and every week, you deliver something, or you have some offer coming up. It is easy to publish all those things with AEM. Because of the day-to-day requirements, you constantly need to change some content, have new campaigns, and have some new posters to be posted on the website. With AEM, it gets pretty easy.

When new clients come for a requirement of a new site, we suggest Adobe Experience Manager because this is one of the best content management systems. It is easy to author, easy to manage, and easy to maintain. Even for clients who have their digital websites on legacy systems, such as custom-based document environments or custom-based Java applications, we suggest migrating from those legacy systems to Adobe Experience Manager because it'll be very easy for them to manage. 

The templates and components that come out of the box are very helpful, especially in terms of the content fragments and experience fragments. Every client would like to have some templates and components, and they would like to cut down the effort of having to create every component that's customized. So, they try to use them out of the box. Other than that, the user roles and permissions workflows, third-party integrations, and system integration are the features that are very important. Workflows are definitely the most important. Otherwise, there'll be no notifications, and there'll be no proper approval process. We suggest solutions to the clients when they want to have a governance model or a process in place, such as someone getting notified when a request is pending for approval.

It is easy to adapt. We do not have to worry about training the practitioners on Adobe Experience Manager. Any freshers coming out of the college know about Java, and it is easy for them to learn and work with AEM.

It is a very flexible, robust, and scalable solution. It is very easy to go to market. The time to publish a particular content is very less.

Adobe has come up with its own stack with Adobe Campaign, Adobe Target, Adobe Experience Manager, and Adobe Photoshop. If you want to integrate the whole MarTech platform into one ecosystem, it is very easy to adapt, learn, integrate, and manage. 

It can easily interact with other systems. You can use Adobe Analytics or Google Analytics. It also gives you the option to use Photoshop and other design tools. It has a lot of features, and it has also got integration with a lot of tools. 

It would be better if it also supports some styling. Currently, whenever we have to do design for a particular client according to their brand strategy, it takes a good amount of effort. Adobe never focuses on this area. They say that you design your pages, templates, etc. If they can define common components or a common section of the style sheet so that if you want to have a button by default, you can go and just mention the specifications, such as the color code, and those specifications are automatically followed across the whole site or multiple sites according to the brand strategy. Such functionality will be helpful because currently, it takes a lot of effort to manage them separately.

They can increase the number of components in terms of combinations. For example, if I take an image and a text component, currently, Adobe gives you just an image and text component. It should provide multiple versions, such as image, text, and video. That's because, on most of the sites, clients always come up with this combination. They want to have a video. They want to have an image, and they want to have some text. There could be options to have any of the following combinations:

• The image on the left, the video on the right, and the text at the bottom.
• The image on the left, the video on the right, and the text at the top.
• The image in the center, the video on top, and the text at the bottom. 

If they can come up with such permutations and combinations, it will make the work easier. It will help us in putting out the site in a faster way, instead of us having to do the regular development every time.

They can come up with some out-of-the-box components to help you drag and drop a video that will be displayed in a particular player. Currently, some of the features are not available, and we have to customize them. They can look into the top video players that are being used by most of the end-users from a location and provide out-of-the-box components. They can look into the features of YouTube, Vimeo, and other top players.

It has been more than eight years.

It's a stable solution. We have been building solutions for so many clients over the years, and we have found them to be stable. They are robust, and you can integrate with any environment. Adobe Experience Manager is built on top of the Java platform, and Java is robust, reliable, and scalable. So, all these features by default come to AEM.

It's scalable, but it depends upon the type of license the client has bought. Normally, when a client comes, we don't handle the infrastructure-related things for the client, but we do tell them to talk to Adobe to understand how many users are going to interact with the website, and how many users are going to visit the page on a day-to-day basis. This way they get to know the right infrastructure cost. For example, if they have between 5,000 to 10,000 users, they can manage with a certain infrastructure. If they have more users, they are suggested to go with a higher license.

We probably have more than 5,000 clients all over the globe. They are in the US, India, and other countries. We are Adobe Platinum Partners, and we are also Adobe's Global Practicing Partners. We have worked with them not only for Adobe Experience Manager but also for their complete suite with Adobe Campaign, Adobe Analytics, Adobe Experience Manager, and Adobe Target.

I don't have much experience with them. We contact them only when something isn't working as expected out of the box. I would rate them a four out of five because it can take time. Sometimes, they take a good amount of time to react to the issues. They ask you to try on the vanilla instance, and when you try and give them logs, they analyze, troubleshoot, and come back. They require a lot of information, and sometimes, we don't have time to wait for that long because the client has critical deliverables to be delivered within the milestones. So, we have to go with some workaround.

It's straightforward.

People do see an ROI using this solution. We have worked with multiple clients who were having issues with people visiting their site and not having a good experience. They saw fewer hits on their website, and some people were not able to find the information very easily, or they could not find the pages to be proactive. User experience is one of the main things that makes a person stick to a site. If you don't stick to a site for more than five seconds, you are going to move out and close the browser. We have seen that the number of hits has increased. We also implement analytics to see the number of hits to a website, the pages that the users are liking the most, and the pages that are not liked the most by the end-users. It helps us in understanding what we need to change. We have seen a very good improvement in the client data after using AEM.

It's definitely an expensive solution, but it comes with a lot of features and scalability. As compared to other content management systems that we have in the market, AEM is the costliest one. There is no hidden or additional fee.

I don't have much insight, but my understanding is that when we compared the solutions in the market, we found Adobe Experience Manager to be one of the best solutions. It has the flexibility in terms of templates, authoring, and publishing time. It is easy to manage this particular tool. 

It is mostly used by functional people, such as authors, but it can be used for any domain. It is not only meant for the technology domain people. It can also be used by the healthcare domain people, such as doctors or scientists, who are working in the lab and doing experiments to update any content. It can also be used by anyone in the banking sector. Because it is not defined for one particular sector, it needs to be easy for the authors to learn and use this tool. They don't need to be too technical for this.

We understand the requirements of our clients and help them with the best option. We try to make people understand the benefits of this tool. We always go with the best features to make new or potential clients understand how easy it is to use and how easy it is to get others trained on this particular tool. We also tell them the benefits that it would bring in terms of ROI. While looking for a tool, every business looks for ROI. So, we let them know how soon they can publish content. If they have their assets, they can just go and author, and it can get published in the next 5 to 10 minutes. They don't have to wait for days. 

I would rate Adobe Experience Manager an eight out of ten. It is one of the best tools in the market.

We use this solution for building websites. We have been an Adobe partner for a long time and we generally recommend their solutions to our customers.

This product is very efficient at managing end-to-end content publishing flows. Our efficiency has increased by 25% since using this product.

The valuable features for us are the content and digital management capabilities. It enables multiple content writers to collaborate and create news articles or news items and scale to a high level of concurrency. 

This product is unable to handle very large video files and related elements. Adobe should focus on a media asset management solution, the solution currently lacks that.

The solution is stable. 

This solution is highly scalable and made up of two types of users; content writers who create the content and publish it (we have up to 600 users) and end-users who browse the site. 

There are two options for the setup, either the customer deploys it or Adobe does. If Adobe is involved, the deployment is very straightforward. If it's the customer deploying it's a little more complex. We deployed in-house and it took a couple of days. Deploying on premise, requires Adobe experienced managers, and certified administrators.

This is one of the more expensive products on the market. We pay an annual license fee. 

Implementing this solution requires someone with at least three years of experience. If anything goes wrong, the cost of fixing it is very high. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10.