We performed a comparison between Hyland OnBase and IBM Datacap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."
"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."
"I like the cloud and its integrability."
"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."
"The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."
"There's something that's very unique about IBM DataCap. It provides me with a good solution for extracting, reading the QR codes, and scanning them. In this stage, we are working in a UIT phase before implementing this protocol in all our branches. From my initial observation, IBM DataCap is good, it is not working too fast, but in a good manner for us."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to capture data, which changes all the time into different formats."
"It helps companies figure out how to use advanced imaging techniques, processes, best practices, and other tools."
"It reduces human error and saves time."
"It is the best solution for scanning purposes."
"I like Datacap's integration with FileNet because financial companies use that export. The second part is web services integration, which is effortless to implement."
"The solution offers many features that are beneficial for customers."
"The installation of the solution is very simple."
"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."
"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."
"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"I've faced some bugs or issues. They should do deeper testing of the product before releasing it because some of the bugs that I found were a bit simple. I understand that it is a massive product, and some of the functionalities can get overlooked."
"Its weaknesses are primarily tied to the lack of available resources and expertise in the market to effectively support and provide solutions and services to each customer for seamless implementation. Expertise in this specific product is rare throughout the market. One key reason is the product's limited downloads. Additionally, archiving solutions are often perceived as complex and challenging, dissuading many companies from venturing into this domain. Consequently, partners who specialize in archiving solutions are always seeking straightforward, uncomplicated options that are easy to manage and meet customer expectations."
"The technical support is horrible. They have downsized the support teams too much. They've outsourced some of them along with some of the development, and they're just stretched too thin."
"Reporting and analytics seem to often be something of an afterthought. With Datacap, they've started building out some dashboards, but one thing we hear from our clients a lot is, "Well, gee, we really love reports. What Datacap has is not really helpful. We'd like something better. We'd like more dashboards." That's one area where we've seen some feedback that the product could do better."
"The IBM Datacap site actually is on the newer inside. They will give it as a plugin only."
"There should be an increase in the capacity of the workflows. Datacap is a little limited in this aspect. So, you cannot really implement all the possibilities."
"I would like better ease of use and more support options."
"Going forward, IBM needs to ensure that the output is perfect (as it can make the product) while staying true to platform's core."
Hyland OnBase is ranked 24th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews while IBM Datacap is ranked 8th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 26 reviews. Hyland OnBase is rated 8.0, while IBM Datacap is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Hyland OnBase writes "Stable content and workflow management solution with a valuable retention module". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Datacap writes "The ability to connect this information with the appropriate database and recognize it irrespective of the format or source is an extremely valuable feature". Hyland OnBase is most compared with Alfresco, SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet and Box, whereas IBM Datacap is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, Microsoft Power Automate, Tungsten TotalAgility, HyperScience and UiPath.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.