Camunda Reviews

I mainly use the solution for learning purposes.

I primarily use the solution in order to get a clear view of my customer, including what we are doing and what processes are being made making it easy to see everything that is happening.

Overall, the solution has been very solid.

The solution is very customizable.

We're currently using the community version, which is open-source and free to use.

The solution is stable.

For the short time I have with the tool, today, I can't see something that is missing as a product and its benefits. Maybe minor things that I haven't had the opportunity to notice yet, like an easy installation using Docker or scripts where you can see the functionality quickly.

I've been using the solution for about a month or so at this point. It's still quite new to me. 

The stability of the product is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. 

We haven't really experimented with scalability at all. We haven't used it for very long. The process we are running now does not have a large volume. Our processing is not too high today. I didn't push the framework to see how it goes with big volume data.

Currently, we have only three people that are using it in the company.

We haven't used the solution for very long and therefore haven't really had a need to reach out to technical support. As I've never been in contact with them, I can't evaluate how useful or helpful they are.

I have looked at Bonita Software a little bit, however, I haven't gotten too far in terms of studying it.

The solution's initial setup has a medium level of difficulty. It's not as easy and it's not hard. Maybe someone who is starting out and doesn't have any experience with any other framework may get into some headaches. However, I've worked with it now and for my level of expertise, it's got a medium level of difficulty to set it up.

We're testing the solution still and therefore we are using the community version right now. I wanted to take a look at the enterprise version, however, my customer would like to see more value before they agree to get into it.

We're just customers and end-users. We're currently still experimenting with the product and learning about it.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I cannot speak to the exact version number, however.

I'd advise users considering the solution to stick to the documentation and go to their GitHub to view some staples. There is a lot of good stuff in there.

So far, we have been happy with the product and its capabilities. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

Primary use case is for fast prototyping innovatie processes within the social domain of the government.

Camunda has enabled us to do quick prototyping within end-to-end team consisting out  of information architects/process architects/developers and product owner to form a consistent view in business value, achitectural compliancy and technology.

The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to other BPM engines out there. It's also more portable than most of them. Next to being open source, the modellers are made in HTML and can be embedded in your own website with little effort.

The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself.

The solution could also use more and better frameworks in terms of embedding them in the engine. Right now the only embedded framework that's supported is Java. It's not a problem because you can also have remote workers that do part of the process through their remote RESTful API which they have clients for, but you cannot embed .NET. You cannot embed that for execution within the engine through delegates, so I would definitely say that would be a plus if they would expand that. Certainly in terms of performance.

I've been using the solution for two years.

I haven't had any issues with any instability.

There's a free version and an enterprise version, so it depends on which you choose but it's very scalable, but you have to understand it's persistence strategies as it uses a centralized database. That's normal for a BPM, however. In their new product Zeebe, which is a derivative of Camunda, they've made it completely decentralized and scalable via partitions, which might be more generic and easier to understand than the forementioned persistence strategies of Camunda. Because of partitioning, Zeebe is also a step forward into better orchestration in a micro service landscape. On the other hand that comes with the cost of complexity of installation. I would say for small to mid-size companies Camunda is scalable enough.

We're using it in the innovation field labs for the government so there's about potentially 350 municipalities there, and the number of people who are participating in this common ground field lab is about 150 potential developers, product owners, business analists that can be tied together in their disciplines around the Camunda Process and Decision Modelling Engines. A few products in those labs are now being developed using Camunda.

We are able to do everything from community support. Everything is well documented there. There has been no need to get support from them specifically but one of the owners writes a lot of papers and presents webinars which you can join for free. I would say they have very, very good support and are very open-source community-minded. I think they are one of the most supportive companies I've seen.

I don't have any knowledge about the paid support, because we don't do paid plans. I suppose that it would be great because if their free seminars and white papers are good, I suppose a higher level of support would be great, they really know what they are doing.

We used a workflow engine. The reason for switching is compliancy by design. Mainly Object Management Group (OMG) and Triple Crown Standards (BPMN, DMN, CMMN), which are supported by Camunda allowed us to reach this compliancy.

It depends on how you set it up. If you want to set it up for demo purposes or development and start working with the product, the set up is fast. The first one I installed took me five minutes and it was running.

We wanted an open source engine. Therefore we did not evaluate other engines such as Mendix, Pega.

We use the free version, the open-source version, but there is an Enterprise option. And the Enterprise version has heat maps so you can easily optimize complex processes on performance. You can easily see the hot spots that need to be scaled in a different manner in terms of hardware or improving your process flow.

I would definitely recommend the solution to anyone. At least for the short-term. They are currently shifting towards their new product, Zeebe. We are actually currently using it already in smaller labs on smaller projects, such as modelling process flow's and micro service orchestration driving front end ui's such as digital assistants. But there is not much difference between the two so, I would definitely advise anyone starting with a BPM, in general, to start with Camunda. I found Camunda really easy to start with.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

The feature that I like most is the decoupling architecture. I can use any other tools to create services and the UI, and then use them together with the Camunda BPMN engine. 

I would like to see more examples of using .NET and Camunda. I'm from the .NET world and I would like to use it, rather than Java. For Java, Camunda is great. For .NET I have opinion that need more real life examples. For example I woudl like to see example of  .NET Blazor UI with Camunda.

Also, I would like to see more examples of how to work with a team of users.

I am new to Camunda BPM and have been using it for only one year.

It is stable and I don't have any problems with it.

I don't have any experience with scaling Camunda in practice. However, I have read about it and feel that it's a scalable solution. We can install a lot of different installation and they can work together.

We didn't have any experience with technical support.

The initial setup is easy. I wouldn't say that it is complex at all. They deployment takes only a day. If you don't want to use something specific then you can install it in two hours.

We use the open-source version, which can be used at no cost.

I would highly recommend the open-source version of Camunda, which can be used free of charge, for any software development company that would like to implement BPM in their software solutions. For software companies, it is a very good product.

You can have BPM in an engine and you can use external software solutions to create the UI, and you don't need to pay anything for licensing. This means that you can incorporate it fully, and use as much as you need. You can expand your software solutions if you want, without any license, which I think is great.

This is a good product but because it's open-source, it's always missing something.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We are using Camunda BPM to schedule outbound phone calls.

The most valuable feature is the scheduling.

The upfront enterprise-level support could have been better. They need improvement.

The initial set up could be simplified, it's complex.

I would like to see better sales support, upfront implementation, and more a more wizard-like walkthrough with the next release.

I have been working with Camunda BPM for three months.

We are using the most recent version.

It's a stable solution. 

We have not had any issues in the three months that we have been using it.

We have not done any scaling yet.

Technical support is good. 

We have more of an issue with sales support.

We did not use another solution previously. Camunda was our first choice.

The initial setup was complex and it took us five days to deploy it.

Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year.

For anyone who is interested in using Camunda BPM, I would recommend reading the documentation. 

The documentation is good and can be easily accessed online.

I am happy with Camunda BPM.

I would rate Camunda BPM an eight out of ten.

Use cases vary depending on the client's needs. It depends on the customer. We have done a lot of flow automation for the return and authorization, like vehicle return material authorization. We have done a lot of automating their campaign systems. .It purely depends on the customer's requirements.

The interface and the number of connectors that they provide are the most valuable features. The support here is kind of okay. But the main thing is with the number of connectors and the UI, the user interface.

The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages.  

It should also have some kind of a custom-engineering extension that will add on to it.

I have been using Camunda for four to five years.

They support a scalable solution on cluster mode. We don't run into a massive scale, but we run with 1 to 5 million. 

The businesses we support range from small to medium.

To be neutral, I would rate their support a five out of ten. Having regional support would add value. 

The initial setup is pretty easy. It depends on the people who are installing it. It generally takes a few days.

I would recommend it, as long as the business team can design the workflows, but the technical team can design the workflows. If they are technical, then I would definitely recommend it. For enterprise-grade, I would recommend looking into bigger equipment. 

I would rate Camunda BPM an eight out of ten. 

The primary use case is for modeling processes.

It allows me to present or to demonstrate the business process flow, visually, without having to resort to PowerPoint, Visio, or other products. 

I can convert it into a real process. Once it is validated visually by the business people, then it can be enhanced into a full-blown process model.

The features that I like the most are the drag and drop.

The simulation feature of this solution needs improvement. As an example, if I wanted to highlight an event then when I press on it, I would like all of the impacted processes to highlight. That way, you can see the impact of an event on different processes.

If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map. 

When it comes to insurance, just to give you an example, there is marketing, then underwriting, policies for contracts, policies for prevention, collections, there are claims, and business flows that we had to create from scratch. If we could have started through a template, it would have helped us kick start the initiative.

I have been using Camunda BPM for one year.

This solution is stable. I have not experienced any issues with this solution.

It's a bit early, so I haven't stress-tested it yet for scalability.

We have three users.

I haven't reached out to technical support.

I found everything on the website. The manuals and tips were useful.

Previously, I used BPM online, but I changed to Camunda BPM because I downgraded my current requirements.

I enjoyed BPM online but needed a more lightweight tool for modeling. BPM online is cumbersome on the modeling side.

The initial setup was straightforward.

It was deployed a year ago, so I can't remember exactly, but I think that I only took a few minutes to deploy.

I did not use an integrator, I did it on my own.

It's free, open-source.

I use the open-source free version.

I reviewed Sygnavio and Pega Systems. 

I chose the Camunda BPM, because I am domain-oriented, and I saw that many companies, especially in my domain, the insurance domain, are using Camunda BPM and that gave me the insight as to where I should focus my efforts.

We are currently a startup with Insur Tech and we are sensitive to cost. It's our strategy and it is the best tool for the price at this time.

What I have learned from using Camunda BPM is to keep it simple.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to run business processes that contain human tasks.

The speed and execution of DMN was a big selling point for us. It's very good at conducting business processes that are easily modeled and presented in a way that's easy to understand. 

Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance. 

The external programs that communicate with Camunda are kind of late 20th century in terms of style and need updating.

We've been using the solution for two years.

In general, the solution is pretty stable. 

It's hard to get information to size it properly if you don't use a Camunda subscription. That might not really be a Camunda issue; it could be a sizing problem. For example, they have issues with very high usage of the database even when there are very few processes running. I had a situation in which the databases were at 100% and they should not have been. 

Right now, we don't have too many users on the solution, but when it is done, we'll have about 25,000. It's quite scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward, but if you need to tweak any part of the it, it can get complex.

We did evaluate other options, but we were looking for something that was open source and small and there's not too much choice for those options.

Right now we use a standalone Camunda in Docker. Before, on previous projects, we used embedded Camunda in Java applications. We use both cloud and on-premises deployment models. For cloud deployment, we use Microsoft Azure as the provider.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for invoices, receipts and purchase orders. There is no specific line of business but we basically use it for some main processes that we want to be automated.

The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part. The data model definition in Camunda is a little complicated, so for someone with industrial engineering background it would be hard. But for someone with a computer engineering programming background Camunda is much more understandable and really easy to use.

Just today I encountered a problem with the current version, and that is the functionality of the BPM standard, which is not yet implemented in Camunda. An example would be a new marker for tasks. Maybe the developers of Camunda can, as soon as possible, provide all possible functionalities of BPM standard in its process engine. Some are not yet supported and they can really cause serious problems for implementers.

In the next release I would like to have more documentation on how it can interact with other organization systems, as well as other documentation about API. I would also like more  support about features. It would be great for someone like me with a little programming and developing background, to see an easier platform for data modeling. A place where you can create your own data model, your own entities, your own entity relationship, and be able to find a form based on that data model. That would be much more straight forward for someone like me, as a teacher. But it's not provided here right now. I would also like an easy to use form builder.

I think this question can be better answered by a developer or someone who is backing the network and server. I'm more concerned with process modeling and the process deployment tasks. But as far as I'm concerned, yes, there hasn't been any problems with stability.

The technical support is good. Just last week, we wanted to know something about our modeler and how to change it to be compatible with the Persian language. The Persian language is a language where you write from right to left, so it's different from most European languages like English. So, when we started to use Persian and modeler, the text was messy and disorderly and we wanted to know how to correct it. We sent emails but the support team said it's better to ask this question on a forum. I asked the question in forums but I haven't received a response yet. I think it may be because this problem is a little rare, so that is why they couldn't help us. But I think the support is good. At least they responded to the email as fast as they could, even though they couldn't provide a solution.

The initial setup was very easy, but we haven't deployed the program yet, as we are still only testing it. We have tested how to deploy new processes, how to use the clips to deploy processes, and how to integrate your modeler into clips. If you are referring to these issues, I think the provided documentation is quite sufficient.

My advice to others would be to know their own abilities, their own resources. Are they comfortable with a lot of programming even for a simple form? Do they have enough programming provided in their resources? If they are not comfortable with that, it can take a little longer for them to adapt to Camunda. But if they have good developers, programmers, HTML, CSS and so on, they won't have a problem. I can also say the documentation is good and they have a live, technical forum where you can ask questions and get a fast response. I am not sure if it is available in all BPM packages, though.

On a scale from one to 10, I will rate this solution a seven, because there are quite a few things that could be improved.