Spryker Cloud Commerce OS

I worked on Spryker Systems  during my last project for Redington. They were selling B2B products on their site, which contained the custom checkout, custom cart page, and quote page that we generated. In Spryker Systems , we have Yves and Zed folders for the back-end, so creating modules requires knowledge of core PHP. The business logic works in layers; there are four layers in its architecture: business, business logic, front-end layer, and application layer where I had to work. Additionally, there is middleware through which I had to pass business logic to the front-end or vice versa to the back-end.

I can confirm that Spryker Systems can be used as a multi-channel platform. In my projects, I used Spryker Systems as an e-commerce site. It contains B2B and B2C, and it is language-based. I was able to change the language in multi-stores and utilize it according to my requirements for Spryker Systems.

If Spryker Systems could improve their code to reduce the layers, that would be beneficial. They are using the facade design pattern in coding; if they could use the factory or repository directly in the front-end or back-end, wherever the developer wants, that would be advantageous. This feature is what I would like to see added.

In Spryker Systems, the most valuable features are that the front-end is a separate part from the back-end. If I am working on the back-end, it is totally different from the front-end. When I connect these, I have a third folder available. When connecting these, I have to use this third folder. The Docker  system image container is perfect for load balancing. In Spryker Systems, there is an EAV structure, but creating attributes there is tricky. I can add a basket over the cart; for instance, if I want to purchase bundle items for one customer, then I can add multiple products. After that, I can create a second bundle item in the cart and proceed with that. I can negotiate price there, and this functionality is also provided by Spryker Systems itself.

The price features are good in Spryker Systems. I can manage price according to customer groups or bases, which I think is valuable functionality.

In Spryker Systems, the main issue is that connectivity is too difficult. If I want to make a small change, I have to pass code through three layers: Zed, Yves, and middleware. This takes a lot of time to change things, and creating attributes for customers and products takes a lot of time as well; this is a significant disadvantage of Spryker Systems.

I used Spryker Systems for around two years, during which I developed modules there and some other APIs to connect the front-end to the back-end. After that, I left Spryker Systems.

I contacted their training partners only, not customer support. I believe it was Florin.

To install Spryker Systems on a system, it is easy and not complicated, because Spryker Systems provides a Docker  image. I can run two or three commands, and it will automatically install on the system; that part is not complicated at all.

These are my skills and right now these are the skills which I am working on with these products. I am currently working on Adobe Commerce , specifically. I do not have experience with Adobe ColdFusion . I worked on Spryker Systems around one year ago. In the last year, I have left Spryker Systems. We were working on maintenance until December. After that, I completely moved on to the Adobe Commerce  project. It is a company project. Our company is providing services to the Redington company, so it is a Redington project. It is only for web. I have not used the headless structure in Spryker Systems. For analytics features, I used a third-party tool like Google Analytics  in Spryker Systems, not Spryker Systems itself, to analyze customer data and other user data. I will recommend Spryker Systems. If someone has a big product, then they can use Spryker Systems there. If they do not want to lose customers' sessions or lose their customers, then Spryker Systems is a viable option. My overall rating for this product is nine out of ten.

My main use case for Spryker Systems  is primarily for e-commerce. I use it to build new cases in the system as my client requires, exploring the features and conducting proof-of-concept projects over the last six months on how clients work and their requirements.

I do not have anything else to add about my main use case or any other interesting projects I have worked on with Spryker Systems .

The best features Spryker Systems offers, in my opinion, is that it is known as composable commerce. It contains numerous features and all the capabilities Spryker has. If you want to use it as a multiple system in a single place, that is the reason Spryker has much capability to achieve in the new AI era. If we want to use anything such as RabbitMQ or Docker , these are the capabilities Spryker has. I recommend Spryker for future clients as well.

Over the last six months, I have found that Spryker Systems' composable commerce and integration capabilities have helped me because Spryker also has the capability with Docker . Using Docker, I can easily install Spryker on my system and utilize Spryker's multiple services such as queue services with a single click. I really appreciate that capability.

Spryker Systems has positively impacted my organization as it is completely new to me. Right now, I am still expanding their features and exploring their capabilities. At an organizational level, I have found that multiple clients want a system that they can easily handle. Spryker is capable of doing it. At the organizational level, I have found many things that Spryker can easily achieve, and that is why Cognizant is ready to extend Spryker Systems' capabilities around their clients.

Spryker Systems could be improved if we can reduce the complexity level. The documentation needs to be explored more, and we need to reduce the complexity because Spryker works between multiple systems. That is the reason we need to reduce the integrability. Otherwise, it will be a more expandable format available to developers. It would be better if we provide better documentation.

I have been using Spryker Systems for six months.

Spryker Systems is stable for me, but there are still many things we need to improve in Spryker to make it truly easy for clients as well.

Spryker Systems can handle growth and increased demand easily as its scalability is correct.

I previously used Adobe Commerce  solution for the e-commerce system before exploring Spryker Systems. I have not switched to Spryker; I am just exploring the next option for the e-commerce system. I am still using Adobe Commerce  and exploring Spryker because sometimes clients want a system where they can easily integrate data. I see that Spryker also has much capability, which is why I think this is the right time to explore their capabilities as well.

I have not seen specific outcomes or metrics, but Spryker has many capabilities that reduce a lot of integration. I do not have any specific metrics to share regarding return on investment right now.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Spryker Systems is that the pricing or setup cost is acceptable for me, but we need to provide a version which is publicly available for developers, so it would be helpful.

Before choosing Spryker Systems, I explored Shopify  and found it to be completely a SaaS-based system. BigCommerce and Shopify  provide many capabilities, which is truly easy for clients who want a website that can open up quickly in a day. Most of the time, they go with Shopify and BigCommerce because of the capabilities they have in their SaaS system. In another way, Spryker Systems and Adobe Commerce do not have such capabilities. Adobe Commerce has a SaaS-based system, but it really works and it has much cost, so low-cost clients are unable to purchase those versions.

My advice for others looking into using Spryker Systems is that it depends on their requirements. If clients want to create a system that is large in scope and they want to expand their system, then Spryker is the best option for that type of client. However, it depends on the type of requirements they have. If they want to explore a system at the microservices level, then Spryker is the best option. I would rate this review a six out of ten.

My main use case for Spryker Systems  is that we have an e-commerce solution in the company that focuses mainly on spare parts sales, but is not limited to that; we also have other options. A concrete example of how I use Spryker Systems  in the spare parts sales area is that it serves as our e-commerce backend system.

The best features that Spryker Systems offers, in my opinion, are the modular system, the headless system, and the back office functionalities.

Spryker Systems has had a positive impact on my company because we were able to generate a significant revenue increase in our e-commerce area. That is not only due to Spryker Systems, but also because we placed a strong focus on e-commerce and developed a stable, global platform. Spryker Systems enabled us here.

I think Spryker Systems could be improved if Spryker pays more attention to their customers and focuses more on promoting B2B business with new features and use cases that are specifically tailored to B2B sales. There are no other improvements I would like to see for Spryker Systems.

I have been using Spryker Systems for five years.

Spryker Systems is a good company with good customer support. However, there are also problems and setbacks from time to time.

I would recommend to others who are considering Spryker Systems that it is not for small companies. The focus should be on B2B sales. Someone who only sells T-shirts does not need the complexity of Spryker Systems.