Compare Building Engines and On-Site 
Building Engines vs On-Site
When assessing the two solutions, reviewers found On-Site easier to use and do business with overall. However, reviewers preferred the ease of set up with Building Engines, along with administration.
- Reviewers felt that On-Site meets the needs of their business better than Building Engines.
- When comparing quality of ongoing product support, reviewers felt that Building Engines is the preferred option.
- For feature updates and roadmaps, our reviewers preferred the direction of On-Site over Building Engines.
User friendly! The ability to create and make changes, whether it be added a building/property, or making changes within a work order.
Nothing as of yet as we are still in the preliminary phase but no complaints from users as of yet.
Easy to use and easy to screen tenants.
I don't like that you have to click the print button to "sign" a lease...that doesn't make much sense to me. I also don't like having On-site and Onesite separated. I think it would be more beneficial for properties to just have one website for everything.
User friendly! The ability to create and make changes, whether it be added a building/property, or making changes within a work order.
Easy to use and easy to screen tenants.
Nothing as of yet as we are still in the preliminary phase but no complaints from users as of yet.
I don't like that you have to click the print button to "sign" a lease...that doesn't make much sense to me. I also don't like having On-site and Onesite separated. I think it would be more beneficial for properties to just have one website for everything.
