Adobe Experience Manager Reviews

It is helpful for hybrid applications, generic templates, third-party data synchronization, and user-specific data restriction and analytics.

It helps us with analytics, application design for specific platforms, and enables us to easily create applications for iOS and Android.

Hybrid applications and Cordova support.

With the default template design, it is difficult to manage the different resolutions of images.

One to three years.

I believe that the primary feature of the product is the ability and extent to which it allows authors to modify, build and operate their website, page components, etc. that otherwise would require a lot more of developer work.

We provide consultancy services to the clients so that our clients can use the product to improve their organization's operations.

The integration of the product with other Adobe Marketing Cloud products could be improved.

I have used this solution for around four years.

Usually, when integrating with other Adobe Marketing Cloud products, we encountered some stability issues, but those are already being worked upon by Adobe.

We did not experience any scalability issues. There are many options for designing the solution, depending upon the expected load/stress.

The technical support is active in responding but may take a while, depending on the complexity of the issue.

Setup is pretty straightforward and well-documented by Adobe.

The product was originally developed by a company called Day Software that was taken over, and then further developed by Adobe, changing its name from CQ5 to Adobe Experience Manager (AEM). Currently, the latest version is AEM 6.3.

When using other Adobe Marketing Cloud products with AEM, I would advise keeping short-term goals instead of going straight ahead to build something massive/complex. Furthermore, selecting an experienced and competitive consulting partner for the development goes a long way.

I think DAM (Digital Asset Management) is most valuable to me.

The data is increasing, and in order to manage millions of assets which a large enterprise has, it provides lots of capabilities (searching, reporting, managing, workflows for automation, etc.).

The other thing, which I liked about the product, is its extension point -- name the solution and it can be integrated.

Some of the prominent ones being Salesforce, translation services, and analytics products. It has OOTB Omniture integration.

We are basically a service provider. It has helped a lot of clients.

The areas where it is helpful were creating and managing multiple sites, and managing assets.

An organization has different divisions, business, etc. and this product helps in managing all those under one roof.

I love DAM, but still think there are improvement areas.

I have been using this product for the past six years.

Yes, we faced issues in one of the projects where we had 50 million users and each user had a lot of personalized pages. (This issue was found when I was working in the CQ Version 5.5, after that, I didn't have any such requirements.)

No.

Adobe provides good support.

If a client faces any issue, through the care account (access once a license is purchased), they can raise the issue and set the priority.

Adobe has dedicated people per client to look into those issues and provides solutions/recommendations.

No.

It is straightforward.

Installation is straightforward, even if somebody is new and he has to create a website -- he is provided with tutorials/sample site, which are great references.

There are different levels of licenses: Evaluate your needs and take the license based on that. In the future, upgrade it per need.

No.

The way it's stored is different from the legacy system, where we used an RDBMS-based solution.

Here, we have a file-based system and all information is saved on nodes. Also, keep in mind David's principle.

If you install one of their sample web sites on exactly one machine, it might actually work.

This product is not open source, and thus, you are at the mercy of poor documentation and support personnel, who generally lack enough experience to solve difficult problems. Their API has poor coding standards, and you will find just about every Object Oriented anti-pattern in their exposed API.The product includes a set of ASP.NET server controls to use when building a basic site, which tend to be extremely flawed. The HTML generated by the server controls are generally impossible to style properly with CSS (for example, no classes/IDs on elements that you would like to style). Your only option is to use their poorly documented and buggy APIs, or attempt to use XSLT to transform the output of their server controls.An Ektron "min site" includes a 300MB Workarea folder, which makes compilation and deployments take a very long time.If you attempt to use multiple web servers with Ektron, you will find that their synchronization solution, eSync, barely works. It will successfully synchronize a MS SQL database instance, but we were never able to get Ektron to reliably synchronize files between web servers. This actually becomes extremely troublesome, because their search feature relies on .txt files dumped onto the filesystem of the web servers with the contents of every web page on your site. Because Ektron fails at synchronizing files, Ektron search fails on multiple servers too.I used this product from versions 7.66 to 8.01 SP1, which totaled about a year and a half. The team I was working on used it to build a number of public facing sites which are still running on Ektron today, unfortunately. We slowly became entrenched in this product due to deadlines and resistance to switch to a different CMS.This review attempts to sum up the miserable experience of using Ektron from a developer's perspective, a server administrator's perspective, and the actual end content editor's perspective.In order to cope with the endless number of bugs with the CMS, we ended up writing our own wrapper API over a basic Ektron site that used REST web services to retrieve content so we didn't have to deploy the actual Ektron codebase with our sites. This allowed us to fix many of the bugs (such as not expiring content properly) , but this kind of effort when we're already paying for a solution is ridiculous.

If you're looking for a .NET based CMS, do yourself a favor and go with an open source CMS. If your company is afraid of open source products, there are much better, less expensive proprietary .NET content management systems out there.