IBM FileNet vs Laserfiche comparison

"It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."

"It has the ability to mix document management and process automation."

"Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues."

"The document collaboration is very good. There is something called Pink Note where departments can collaborate within the document. It has a built-in viewer to see any type of document."

"The product is very stable."

"I would highly recommend it to those seeking a robust enterprise content management solution."

"FileNet provides a compact solution for midsized companies."

"We use IBM Datacap's capabilities to capture data and then we use FileNet's capabilities for filing, to create an archive of documents... We [also] use FileNet's ability to expose information via APIs and interoperate with other systems."

"This is a very complete and powerful solution."

"The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing."

"The setup process is very complex."

"To start with there are too many add-ons, which makes it hard for us. If they simplified the add-ons and plugins to be added to our existing systems, it would definitely help us in the future."

"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."

"The solution’s pricing could be improved."

"It would be nice to have additional integration features, which could be integration with IoOT-based products and solutions that also have automation requirements on the IOT side. Anything can be integrated from a Gateway or API perspective would be a plus."

"FileNet and similar enterprise-level tools require substantial costs, starting in the millions, which limits their use to large enterprises."

"The area of migrations to new versions must be made easier. It's quite good that they have now begun to improve the API area, to modernize the interfaces, but there's always a very big investment involved in migrating from one version to another. That prohibits rolling out new functionalities to customers. It's not so easy.... In that area, they really must improve."

"We would like to see more features for RPA and AI."

"The platform is inexpensive."

"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."

"FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too."

"​There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need.​​"

"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."

"The biggest issue is the cost of the FileNet, because the license cost is very high. If a customer doesn't have good technical guides that are aware of the license calculation, they will pay too much. FileNet's license calculation depends on the processor and number of users. So my advice to a new customer is to be very careful with your calculations before purchasing FileNet."

"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."

"The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do."