Izenda vs. OpenText Magellan

With Izenda, we can offer our trusted users dashboards, generated custom reports, and ad-hoc reporting, right within our own operation. Integrating the Izenda tool directly into our usage meant that we were suitable to use a small corridor of Izenda as core functionality while reserving the more advanced sections of Izenda for guests willing to pay redundancy for the licensing.

It depends on extensibility, set-up, access & style. Actuate performs fairly well, but has performance issues because it sits on top of eclipse, which sits on top of Java. Extensibility usually comes at that price. Set-up is fairly straightforward and it can be secured.

Incentivized

• User and tenant management is excellent. It is very simple to implement and easy to manage.
• The configurability and customizability are excellent. We have access to all aspects of the system and have rebranded and configured single sign on. The users really like it.
• Reports and visualizations work. There's lots of flexibility and users enjoy creating reports themselves.

Incentivized

• Ability to connect to different kinds of sources, including web services, and customize those queries to the extend needed
• Provide tools to customize the look & feel of the reports as much as needed, even being able to choose different appearances for different outputs
• Allowing scripting in the reports extends the functionality available
• Allowing to embed reports without further licensing and maintaining all the functionality

Incentivized

• It would be superb if power users were ready to input a SQL statement to create a knowledge set.
• The data source selection view while creating a replacement report.

• Report rendering can take a long time for large reports (250,000+ pages) - we run these in batch over night
• The deployment of production code from development to test to production enviroments can be complex due to the number of components that must compile

Incentivized

I am no longer working for the company that was using Actuate but I believe they would continue to use it because the stitching costs would be to high. It would require a complete rewrite of the reports and the never version of Actuate (BIRT) even required an almost complete report rewrite

Incentivized

With the help of Izenda, we are able to build a mature foundation that users can quickly customize to their needs. Once permissions are layered in, we can simply use the same report and only show fields a specific user has access to.

It is quite intuitive to use. It is fit specifically for doing sentiment, emotion, and intention analysis as well as text classification and text summarization. I would have given 10 if it is fit for the purpose of doing image processing and analysis as well. There is a huge market to analyze video and image data.

Incentivized

Izenda always provides great support to their users.

Always there on the front and backend for us and the client.

We compared to other end user tools like Qlik, Tableau and Power BI. These tools are very refined but not positioned for OEM/Embedded use cases. The closest we came was logi and Birst and the price and business model of Izenda was much more appealing

Incentivized

It is vastly superior to these in many ways, for complex reporting it is a much more sophisticated solution. Visualizations are very good. Javascript extensibility is very powerful, others don't support this or as well. Pentaho and MS are both OLAP oriented. Pentaho is moving more toward big data, which was not our primary focus. Others are stuck in the Crystal Reports Band metaphor.

• One of the best user interfaces.
• Even a non-tech person can use it.

• Actuate can handle 50 to 60 sub reports inside a report very well.
• Dynamically creating the datasource, chart, graph, reports are the main advantages. We can do any level of drilling, and can create a performance matrix dashboard efficiently.