Vitrium vs FileOpen

Is Vitrium truly a viable solution for digital rights management? User reviews from the past year suggest that Vitrium DRM is a strong contender in the digital rights management space, particularly lauded for its user-friendly interface and robust security features. Users highlight the platform's intuitive design, noting that it doesn't require end-users to download any additional plugins or software, making it incredibly easy to implement and use. For instance, one user specifically praised Vitrium for successfully protecting their intellectual property, preventing unauthorized access to their reports. This ease of use, combined with its strong security measures, makes it a practical choice for businesses looking to safeguard their digital assets. However, some users have pointed out that Vitrium's pricing could be more competitive compared to other similar tools available. Additionally, there have been occasional reports of "Proxy Errors" encountered by clients, potentially stemming from firewall or proxy server configurations on the user's end. Despite these drawbacks, Vitrium seems to excel in its core functionality, providing a user-friendly platform with robust security features. Overall, Vitrium appears to be well-suited for businesses, particularly those dealing with sensitive digital content and prioritizing ease of use and robust protection. Its intuitive interface and strong security features make it a practical choice for companies looking to safeguard their intellectual property without adding complexity for end-users. However, businesses with tighter budgets might need to weigh the platform's benefits against its cost compared to competitors.

Is FileOpen truly an open-and-shut case for document security, or does it leave users feeling locked out? User reviews from the past year paint a mixed picture. While some appreciate its robust features and integration capabilities, a chorus of complaints about compatibility issues and subpar customer support raises red flags. For instance, users have reported frequent error messages when trying to open files, particularly on Apple devices, describing the process as "basically impossible" and citing unhelpful error messages like "Error contacting Permission Server." This suggests that while FileOpen aims to provide a seamless experience, it sometimes misses the mark, leaving users frustrated and unproductive.A key differentiator for FileOpen is its reliance on a plugin-based approach for PDF viewing, contrasting with competitors like LockLizard that use proprietary formats. While this allows for broader compatibility with existing software like Adobe Acrobat Reader, users have pointed out that this advantage is undercut by the plugin's own shortcomings. The lack of basic features like saving annotations, as highlighted by a user who lamented the inability to "even use the tools," further diminishes the user experience. This dependence on a plugin that doesn't meet user needs undermines FileOpen's strengths and raises concerns about its long-term viability.In conclusion, FileOpen seems best suited for businesses prioritizing basic document security over a smooth user experience. Its robust features, when they work, offer granular control over document access. However, its compatibility issues, especially with Apple products, and lackluster customer support make it a risky choice for businesses requiring a dependable and user-friendly solution. For those seeking a more refined and reliable experience, exploring alternatives might be a wiser course of action.