SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Smart Communications

Other Print and packaging software vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Smart Communications. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 45 that differ from Smart Communications on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Smart Communications has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Smart Communications” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at Smart CommunicationsFound at Smart Communications, not found there
Printixprintix.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Printix 26/100 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact 4 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 Compare
Kickflipgokickflip.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kickflip 32/100 2 Data location stated, Public pricing 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
3DPrinterOS3dprinteros.comSee also Transparency alternatives to 3DPrinterOS 30/100 2 Data location stated, Public pricing 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Customilycustomily.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Customily 30/100 2 Data location stated, Public pricing 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
SEAL Systemssealsystems.deSee also Transparency alternatives to SEAL Systems 30/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 2 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent Compare
Threekitthreekit.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Threekit 30/100 2 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
WilcomWorkspacewilcom.comSee also Transparency alternatives to WilcomWorkspace 30/100 2 Data location stated, Status page with history 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Francotyp-Postaliafp-francotyp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Francotyp-Postalia 26/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Priintpriint.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Priint 26/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Printboxgetprintbox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Printbox 26/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 3 Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Vjoonvjoon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Vjoon 26/100 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Paginationpagination.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pagination 22/100 2 Data location stated, Public pricing 4 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 Compare

Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.