Bizagi vs TIBCO Business Studio comparison

"One of the features I like is that when drawing any task, when putting a task on the process model canvas, I can simply click on it and see the other task icons for that task. It's just one quick, simple, straightforward connectivity from task to task."

"I like that Bizagi is fully compatible with BPMN 2.0. It also eases the way in which we work with BPMN 2.0 itself, which is a comprehensive and rather complex notation standard."

"The product has a comfortable GUI and a good environment for users."

"The user interface is pretty good."

"I like the ease of use and the fact that you can download and use their free version, which is unlimited. However, while it's unlimited use, some features aren't available."

"The documentation capabilities are very good. Very structured documents and process versions are valuable features, and being able to communicate that to our customers is also a very good feature. It has a good balance between the effort and the result. So, you don't need to be too detailed. You can document while you are modeling, which is a very good feature."

"The API is pretty straightforward."

"It automates a completely manual, complicated process."

"The setup cost is definitely reasonable."

"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."

"The setup cost is definitely reasonable."

"Also, the tool sometimes feels not so mature when we find random deploy errors from testing to production environment."

"The gateway through which it connects with other vendors, specifically RPA vendors, is one aspect that could be improved."

"I'm not really satisfied with the reporting aspect."

"It works slowly on the cloud, sometimes."

"The performance could use improvement. We couldn't connect the processes to on one file. The performance is an issue for us."

"Its performance needs to be improved. The main thing is that it is limited, especially in terms of the response times. When the processes become a bit large, it is very awkward to work with the Bizagi modeler. When you have already modeled but start to rearrange, it is quite a bit of an effort to change the stuff. When you rearrange lanes or have new structures, it goes rather squiggly up and down and so on, which could be improved. The visual outputs of the DIREPs of the process models are pixelated and have a bad image quality. It is a PNG or JPEG, and you cannot export it as a PDF. When you have rather large processes, you should be able to arrange them hierarchically. Currently, it is not supported. If you use sub-processes and inflate a process, suddenly the arrangement is totally different, and although you know the process, you have to look where is it now. You need a good understanding of the levels of your processes before you start in Bizagi. It can have automatic support for optimal presentation. In BPM, you should have it from the top left to the bottom right. However, in most cases, people don't know how they should arrange it. Therefore, it would be nice to have a suggestion system for different arrangements to be able to better present the process."

"I would like to see the automation process included in the next release."

"The solution was very limited."

"The interface is actually quite confusing."

"An artificial intelligence feature that evaluates the quality of the code developed with one click would definitely be good."

"An artificial intelligence feature that evaluates the quality of the code developed with one click would definitely be good."

"The modeling part of the software is free. Most of the time, it is used for this purpose."

"Its price is reasonable."

"The paid version costs us about $20,000 for 100 users annually."

"This solution would be expensive for a company that has a lot of users."

"It is only necessary to pay for licenses when ready to deploy applications to production."

"The modeler itself is free. For the whole BPM suite, there are other options that may be better."

"I think that its price is reasonable."

"We didn't use the licensed versions where you could exactly go into automatization. However, we looked at the pricing in the beginning, and the only thing that I remember is that it was too expensive for the things we were using because our clients would also have to license the product. One client said that it was too expensive for the benefit they get out of it."

"For my company, the tool costs about 2,0,000 Euros for three years...If one is bad and ten is good, I rate the price as one out of ten."