Adobe Experience Manager Reviews: 4.0/5 — Solid Choice

The best thing about this web administrator is the possibility of editing or modifying things within each internal page of the site with just clicking and moving the mouse; The creation of editable spaces is simple and there are many modifiable features within the options. It is also important to note that sharing with many users does not present problems and full or restrictive permits can be given depending on who enters

The tool itself is slow and heavy for quick changes. In addition many minor changes such as Titles and Descriptions require unnecessary steps for approval, which influences this slow process that characterizes AEM

One of the clients of the agency used this tool to manage their site and gave me full access. I focus on modification of Meta Data but I have also made design modifications.

As with almost all Adobe products, AEM is a very powerful tool. It can make working with other Aodbe products very seamless.

As with most Adobe products a certain amount of understanding is required in order to get where you want. If you do not have a goal, and just want to look around, it is very intimidating

AEM helped unite our content with our website and mobile app. Now we can generate content using many different Adobe products and AEM ties them all together.

I like the ability you have to take a tool that can take a hard difficult technical process and make that process simple and easy to implement.

There are some restrictions for what you can do with the product.

We solved implementation of analytics tracking and that allows for us to put code in easier.

Even though much of its capabilities are more developer friendly than avg-user friendly, it's a flexible platform that always accommodates. I like the content tree and seeing DAM photos in context.

It could be a lot more WYSIWYG than it is.

Multiple websites, multiple needs for content, content sharing. Benefits are in the close-knit structure of sites.

I can't think of anything, Maybe it uses Java and enterprise world really loves Java

- It is too heavy to use. - It is a left-over of an era where everything should be run on Java ( I remember google wave) - requires you to learn stuff that is not useful somewhere else like OSGi and such - Not sure if spring supports this, and Spring is the golden framework for App dev in Java(Yeah we have Quarkus and Micronaut but they are not as popular as Spring)

Maybe easier management of Enterprise content?

should have more resorses for connection

not all the tools free should have more tools useful

it's solving the low quality of jpg and it's usful for persentation the work

I like that it is a platform with many integrations that are essentially out of the box with vendors. It makes it easier to connect applications and the ability to leverage other adobe tools more seamlessly.

it's overly complicated to use, and it is a challenge to find AEM developers that can easily do dev work on the site. It takes more resources to run it and the cost of the tool is so much that it makes it challenging to hire those additional resources.

AEM solves the problem of needing a platform to host our websites in multiple languages. We are able to manage the multiple sites and the integrations with the other tools makes it easier than it would be if we were not using AEM in some cases.

It streamlines and standardizes the processes throughout an organization

harder to implement for smaller businesses (more suited for larger corps)

offers a way to review workflows, publish, relate, show, and standardize workflows

The user interface of the software is intuitive and the experience is user friendly.

It seems like there are constantly bug issues.

Easy for content uploads but always having bug issues.

AEM was very easy to learn and begin building web pages.

I'm not sure if it the way our developers set it up, but I don't have much control over the CSS or HTML within components.

I am quickly able to build a landing page that looks and feels like the rest of our site.

The DAM software allows for our design team to edit variable content in fixed templates, which allows us better control and brand continuity overall.

They don't have enough training resources and everything has to be purchased a la carte. This makes for a much longer trajectory for platform development.

We are using AEM for online publishing and asset management.

I like that Scene7 can host different accounts/companies within their system which makes it a more holistic experience that can store a wide range of content and media assets in their portal.

I dislike that Scene7 can be clunky to use and load time is long.

Business problems include renaming all assets for consistency across the brand.

Loved the way it was so easy to build pages and integrate our branding.

The price. We loved the product but ended up going with someone else for price point.

Nonprofit - needed a better platform and web developing.

Scalability. It is pretty easy to add components and configure as needed. The HTML code editor makes it easy to import existing content your teams have already designed. Widgets are useful. Tree structure helps maintain several instances.

Tree structure lacks organization. Navigation takes longer than it should across interfaces. Online editor does not automatically synchronize with your IDE, so a lot of manual work to keep things sync'd.

Client WebSphere site migration to content management hub. Very straightforward in customization.

As far as enterprise WCMS go AEM is second to none. It features a rich authoring experience with more features and plugins than you could ever need.

It is a niche environment so finding support and good developers can be difficult at times. Also documentation and Adobe Professional Services are poor.

I have rolled out AEM at half a dozen Fortune 500 companies and they want the same thing. Quick time to market and easy content marketing through all web channels.

Extremely powerful platform that integrates with other Adobe products. If developing a structured standardized site it helps lock down the authoring environment. Integrates well with translation platforms.

Requires a developer to make what seems like simple changes. The DAM included is somewhat limited. Must have a Java developer available to take full advantage of the platform.

Creating a website for our company to drive leads and provide support for existing customers. Increased leads from organic search

Very plug and play; easy to use once configured

Implementation has been difficult and costly.

Ability to put publishing in hands of content producers is very helpful. Removes need for large front-end dev team.

Not provided

Not provided

Not provided

It was very organized and allowed for detailed tracking

Very time consuming to understand and get trained

Email A/B testing and tracking. Depending on audience subject line matters

I like the idea of content structure in the AEM, like inline editing and template features. I like the Idea of visual content management when users can add or remove some components.

It is cumbersome and has poor development documentation and support. The AEM uses a lot of obsolete and slow technologies like JCR, Sling. Also, I should mention that it is not Open Source.

The main problem that AEM solves is content management, and in my humble opinion, it is doing not so well in this task. But if you invest a decent amount of effort you will able to reach your goals

Provides a way to manage an online collection of PDF files that is visible to clients

The platform lacks intuitive organization, consistency and no alpha order of your documents

We are able to provide and manage a collection of PDF documents online

I like how easy it is to create collections in folders that are visually appealing. It is also very simple to upload assets.

I don't like how there is not a "back" button. If you enter search terms, click on an asset to get a closer look, and then go back, you will lose your search terms and results. I also do not how it does not display the number of results in a search.

We have temporarily solved the problem of where to put things.

I don't like anything about this, it's a frankenstein mix of acquired assets trying to be an enterprise product.

It's confusing and difficult to use, it feels dated by at least a decade if not more. Nearly any CMS will perform better than this.

It's being implemented as a replacement of another enterprise content management system. So far not benefitting at all from the installation.

AEM has a lot of flexibility and I guess the user facing side is ok.

On Premise AEM/CRXE Lite is ridiculously rigid and over engineered. If you make one change to a workflow, inevitably, three others break. No offense to programmers, but it's obvious progammers designed it. In no way intuitive. Stupid nested data structure. Adobe wants you to use their OOTB functionality and retrofit your needs to it. When they snub your enhancement requests, you have no choice but to do custom code. They like to randomly take away useful features, like Search & Promote, leaving you out in the cold and scrambling to find a solution on your own. Does not play nice with non-Adobe software. God forbid you try to integrate with Salesforce. Double whammy. Adobe's documentation is rarely helpful. Lots of 404 pages on Adobe Experience League. It's poorly organized and either gives you not enough information or too much uber technical Adobe jargon that means nothing. Much like Apple, Adobe wants total indoctrination from its clients. Thousands of paid consulting hours evaporate in a few weeks, and usually the results are "upgrade to (significantly more expensive) AEM CaaS, buy this add-on, buy this other add-on... If it sounds like I have an axe to grind, it's because I do.

It was well in place when I started at my company. I would dump it in a minute It's way too complicated, unintuitive, and the learning curve is huge. It causes more problems than solutions and there are much easier, less expensive platforms that would do the job.

Except that its only one jar and only takes a click to start your nightmare, Nothing good here.

Marketed as the best CMS and with many other huge claims, most of them are half truths if not flat lies. Marketed as OSGi, AEM in reality falls flat on key feature of OSGi, like ability of handling dependencies to the same library but with different versions. JCR is like filesystem but not truly a file system and this causes you lot of pain. TouchUI is said to be the future and but classicUI is what you will be using in reality, as TouchUI is not yet right there. Many features can only be used in theory like iParasys(designer's nightmare) for responsive design. Its an old system and hence has its not own legacy issues, as they have shied away from complete re-writing of the system. You pay a hefty price for license and will go through huge pain for implementing it. Maintenance is not easy as training staff is costly, it has a long learning curve and skilled consultants are again pricey and hard to find. To gain anything out of the power of this Monster you will probably need new Infrastructure and architecture which again can be costly. And the Marketing never stops, they try to sell you target and cloud services and other stuff.

This system might be good for intranet sites and govt sites which are fairly static, something like sharepoint or any old java based cms might be used for. But not a fit for many other USE CASES like eCommerce. Open source CMSs are free, as in free Cat. You still need to feed the free Cat . But AEM is pricey, as in a Pricey Elephant. And a Pricey Elephant takes lot more than a Cat.

Absolutely nothing. This software is complete garbage.

Pretty much everything. This is a front-end developers worst nightmare. Even with training our team struggled to understand how to use this CMS. What benefit it actually brings for its price is still a mystery to me.

This tool has had no bearing, in my opinion to our solutions to problems or the realization of any benefits for the company.

As an web platform, AEM offers great flexibility for developers.

As a stand-alone brand portal, AEM lacks the out-of-the-box features included in most DAM systems such as robust metadata management, duplicate recognition, advanced search functions.

Stand-alone, password-protected DAM for marketing assets.

I liked the on-site training given by Adobe's staff. They were knowledgeable and thorough. I liked the ability to create separate mobile and desktop templates.

I dislike how overly complex it is to build an easily maintainable CMS. What takes a week in WordPress or Drupal, takes months in AEM. Developers have to build the text boxes, submit buttons and edit screens for users. This adds additional time and complexity to implementing anything. Most CMS systems are not "out-of-the-box" solutions but this is beyond "custom".

The problem we are solving is moving from a home grown solution to an enterprise solution. The benefits we hope to see come from the approval process queue and ability to generate more dynamic content.

Platform was highly customizable, has tons of features build like versioning, workflow, roles, permissions

Platform requires engineers to set up templates. Templates are not straightforward to create.

We want our non-engineers to be able to make updates to the website

CQ's initial layout, after logging in, is standardized and easy to navigate. The categorical folders and setup make it easy to find what you are looking for.

Making changes on a test landing page within CQ is often hard to do. I have found the sidekick feature very temperamental and, often, confusing. Assuring that there are less glitches and chances of the sidekick crashing, or not showing up in the first place, would be very helpful.

I have used CQ5 to post news materials to my organization's website. It makes the materials look seamless online, but, again, has been very temperamental and difficult to deal with.