Axero's Communifire is an Enterprise Social and Collaboration platform. Used internally, it connects employees, key customers and partners to pursue shared goals. Used to build an online community, it puts the emphasis on working together, not just meeting socially. The platform, designed to encourage the spread and expansion of ideas is suited for organizations that want their community to not only get connected but also feel they are getting things done.
N/A
HCL Connections
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Connections from HCL Technologies (formerly from IBM, acquired by HCL in 2018) is a collaboration tool and employee digital workspace with key features like social analytics, blogs, document management, and a social network.
N/A
Pricing
Axero
HCL Connections
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Axero
HCL Connections
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Axero tailors your investment to meet your unique needs. Custom pricing and volume discounting available. Contact Axero for details.
I evaluated a number of platforms. Here's the list: Mango Apps, Jive, Jostle, Zyncro, Bitrix 24, Exo platform, Huddle, Confluence, Hip Chat, Wrike, Hive. Some of the other platforms were really nice but Communifire was the platform that best meet our needs.
The customer service from Communifire was what initially hooked us - quick, honest and reliable. With the others mentioned above we did receive some good service, some poor service and at times virtually no service at all. As we progressed with trial accounts of each system …
We selected Communifire for the excellent sales support, strong feature set and quick set up time. We were able to get started immediately and build out features as need required which led to faster execution and higher adoption rates among our team.
I did an in-depth comparison of the leading 3 platforms and selected Communifire based on price for features. When I had such a positive experience with their unbelievable support, I knew we made the right decision.
Provided me many options, e.g. wiki, video, cases, forums, facebook like posting, articles, blogs, file area, and the ability to create sub communities. Nobody else came close to offering these items at a fair price, package clarity, and ease of use.
IBM Connections offers a complete package of tools that can be useful but it doesn't integrate well with other services. Competitors like Yammer offer slightly fewer features but are cheaper and much easier to maintain. If we were making a decision today we probably would …
Confluence is a much truer Wiki system, with easier to understand permissions, better management of content, a better plugin ecosystem, far greater enterprise adoption, and above all else, functional search! If users generate wiki pages inside of Confluence, we actually can …
IBM Connections is similar to the tools provided in collegiate settings (like Blackboard), but with more emphasis on the social media model and less focused (sometimes too many options/features is a bad thing). I find the file sharing and collaboration pieces to be the most …
We did not select IBM Connections via searching. We had a previous IBM product that was discontinued and so when we were given IBM Connections, we did evaluate it but not against other systems. However other one off products had been evaluated/used in the past but as I just …
From the few times that I have used MS SharePoint, I can say that it doesn't seem to hold a candle to the robust features of IBM Connections. The out-of-the-box capabilities of IBM Connections are amazing and are more easy to access and use than what I've seen with MS SharePoint.
IBM Connections Cloud is a strong competitor to Office365. It provides more functionality for users (e.g. web meetings) at a lower price point and tighter integration.
Because of the open design of the product but also because of the main support for http://activitystrea.ms/ which was a huge jump in end user news retrieval of the environment. The overall cost of the product was so much lower than comparing products as out of the box IBM …
I have evaluated IBM Connections against MS Sharepoint and IBM Lotus Notes. I would say IBM Connections is beneficial in comparrison to Lotus Notes applications because IBM Connections by default works with browsers vs LN Client and it is easy to use. However with developing …
At the time we were evaluating collaboration tools we weren't sure if our users were ready for it or not. As such we wanted to purchase a product where the users could get the feel for collaboration without making a huge software and infrastructure commitment in case they would …
IBM Connections is much more advantageous than a simple cloud storage, such as Dropbox. Dropbox is simple and easy to use, however it does not offer all the features IBM Connections has. The additional abilities of IBM Connections make it a great tool for companies and …
I have not personally evaluated other products, as I just manage day-to-day operations. I am not a developer, so I am unsure as to how IBM Connections compares to other products in the marketplace.
Specific scenarios where Communifire would be well suited to an organisation, would be companies that are people focused and committed to frequent and open communication channels from both the top-down and bottom-up. It also would suit organizations that are committed to providing the staff opportunities to collaborate, share and actively contribute to company initiatives and planning. If these aren't elements of your organization's culture, the system would still work for you or those companies who just want to push information out and have an effective intranet. Communifire would cater to these scenarios just as well and is more than capable of providing that type of simple solution.
IBM Connections is possibly most suited for larger organizations where bigger teams are able to have more people to share with. Also, it may be less appropriate when there is so much security that it would hinder the anytime, anywhere access capabilities and prevent users from being able to enjoy sharing content with each other.
Search in connections is incredibly poor. It's commonly joked that once data goes into Connections, you never find it again, unless you have a direct link. This alone kills usability for Connections.
Embedded content in wiki pages in connections is poorly implemented. While the content displays, you can't interact with it, or edit it reasonably, and it's really slow to load.
The "social" features in Connections are pretty lame, and no self-respecting user spends any time trying to build their profile. It's just disappointing.
Our business depends upon this software to provide information on all aspects of our business. The future of business is a marriage between web site and customer interaction. This software will allow us to move in that direction.
Connections has continued to more than meet our needs from a collaboration point of view and we are currently working on integration with our IBM Websphere portal platform to provide an integrated collaboration solution. This scenario will provide our users the best both products have to offer in a single interface.
This rating has a caveat - there is always room for improvement, and this team gets it. You always learn from customers how to do things better and easier, so it is a constant learning of how people use the site. Although the search engine is exceptional, most people do not use it as their first line of research. Much of the usability has to do with layout - and is not just a software usability item, so the rating is severely dependent up on the layout/options you choose for your usage. And their team will do anything in their power to get the results and layout you want. The areas that need improvement - and acknowledged by the team - are the administrative tools. There are a ton of options, and it takes a little to learn some of those. For most people, however, this won't be an issue, because the support team will always help you. This is always the case with more power. If there were fewer options it would no doubt be easier, but they give you the keys to all of the cars in the lot; so a little more to learn.
Connections combines all the most useful abilities from various social networks. This makes it useful of course, but it also reduces user adoption time initially by allowing users to get comfortable with basic features. Once they are comfortable, it's easy for users to start exploring. They find new people in the organization to contact, new sources of information, etc. Before you know it, about half of the users are contributing back in some form -- and all with little or no training needed by IT.
Once Connections was installed, patched, etc. it was ALWAYS up. We only had to bring it down for OS updates to the servers. That seems to be typical of anything that runs on WebSphere; it's bulletproof and could probably run for months and years if the underlying OS didn't require constant patching.
IBM Connections web UI, mobile app (data sync to / from the device), and file transfer speeds were almost always very fast. It was rare for a slow-down of any kind, even when doing searches.
IBM Support has ALWAYS been quick to respond, regardless of the product. Even first level techs seldom provide "canned" responses and they really try to help. If they can't help, they don't wallow around but engage the right person immediately. It's very rare that the first level tech needs to escalate, and even more rare when they do escalate and the next person engaged cannot solve it. We have been more than satisfied with IBM support's quick and professional responses to our issues.
Try to understand you will never find a product which suites all your end user for 100%. IBM Connections is the best of all breeds but if you go look on each functionality on its own there are better example out there. But as IBM COnnections delivers it all in just one platform makes it the best example about integration of different functionality into one platform.
I evaluated a number of platforms. Here's the list: Mango Apps, Jive, Jostle, Zyncro, Bitrix 24, Exo platform, Huddle, Confluence, Hip Chat, Wrike, Hive. Some of the other platforms were really nice but Communifire was the platform that best meet our needs.
IBM Connections offers a complete package of tools that can be useful but it doesn't integrate well with other services. Competitors like Yammer offer slightly fewer features but are cheaper and much easier to maintain. If we were making a decision today we probably would choose a combination of Yammer, Slack, Microsoft Teams, and other Microsoft or Google Tools.
Scaling UP is never an issue with IBM's core technologies like WebSphere, DB2, etc. as long as you have or can find the technical resources to implement it. Where IBM seems to fail is scaling DOWN for smaller organizations. Connections 5.0 on-premises would have required us to create 7 servers -- yes, they would be virtualized, but still that's 7 OS licenses, 40 virtual CPU cores, 80GB RAM, and a few TB of hard disk space. All to replace Quick which runs on 1 server with 1 OS license, 4 cores, 8GB RAM and 600GB of disk. Granted, there are major differences in capabilities between the two, but how do you get a CFO understand why features like a mobile app, file sync, and social sharing require 10x the back-end resources?
Faster, more consistent onboarding. We host all training materials in an easy-to-access and easy-to-update space.
Better product knowledge = greater sales. We post training information about new products for immediate use by all team members.
Better communication within the store team translates to better customer service. Keeping part time team members up-to-date has always been a challenge. Now they are able to catch up quickly when they get to the store.