Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Flowable vs Mozilla Firefox

Flowable logo

Flowable

Automation Integration

Apache 2.0 BPMN, CMMN and DMN engine from the team that originally built Activiti

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Mozilla Firefox logo

Mozilla Firefox

Technology

An independent web browser with its own rendering engine, funded almost entirely by search placement deals.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Flowable the open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.; Mozilla Firefox roughly 85 per cent of Mozilla's revenue comes from search default placement deals, overwhelmingly with Google, so the organisation that competes with Chrome depends on Chrome's owner for its funding and any renegotiation lands on Firefox's engineering budget within a quarter.
  • They diverge on capability: Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, Mozilla Firefox covers Gecko engine.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Flowable and Mozilla Firefox actually diverge.

Attributes where Flowable and Mozilla Firefox differ
AttributeFlowableMozilla Firefox
Pricing modelquoteUnknown
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudWindows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android
CategoryAutomation IntegrationTechnology
FoundedUnknown2004

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Flowable

  • BPMN 2.0 engine
  • CMMN case management
  • DMN decision tables
  • Spring Boot integration
  • Modelling studio
  • Task and case application
  • REST APIs
  • History and audit

Only in Mozilla Firefox

  • Gecko engine
  • Full webRequest blocking
  • Total Cookie Protection
  • Container tabs
  • Extended Support Release
  • policies.json and ADMX
  • Built-in developer tools
  • Firefox Sync

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Flowable

  • An insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and BPMN alone cannot express itnot Mozilla Firefox
  • A bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing Spring Boot estate rather than buying a separate platformnot Mozilla Firefox
  • A team leaving Activiti or jBPM that wants the same API family with active commercial maintenancenot Mozilla Firefox
  • A regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisorsnot Mozilla Firefox

Mozilla Firefox

  • Web development where you need to test against a non-Chromium engine before shipping, because Chromium-only testing hides real bugsnot Flowable
  • Users who require a full-strength content blocker, which Chrome's Manifest V3 no longer permitsnot Flowable
  • Managed fleets that need a browser on a slow release cadence with Group Policy control, using the ESR channelnot Flowable
  • Handling several accounts on the same service at once through container tabs, without separate profiles or private windowsnot Flowable

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Flowable

  • The open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.
  • It expects Java engineering capacity; teams looking for a business-user low-code automation tool will find the modelling and deployment cycle far too technical.
  • Enterprise pricing is not published and is quoted per deployment, leaving buyers without a benchmark against Camunda or IBM alternatives.
  • The Activiti fork left three engines with related APIs and overlapping documentation in circulation, and search results routinely return advice for the wrong one.
  • Flowable AG is a small Swiss company relative to its competitors, so the partner network, training market and pool of engineers with production experience are all limited outside Europe.

Mozilla Firefox

  • Roughly 85 per cent of Mozilla's revenue comes from search default placement deals, overwhelmingly with Google, so the organisation that competes with Chrome depends on Chrome's owner for its funding and any renegotiation lands on Firefox's engineering budget within a quarter.
  • Desktop market share sits at a few per cent, so commercial sites are tested against Chrome and Safari and a Firefox-only rendering or WebRTC bug is triaged as low priority by the site owner, leaving you with the workaround.
  • On iOS and iPadOS the browser is a WebKit shell required by Apple's rules, so it delivers the interface and Sync but none of the engine, extension or tracking-protection behaviour that make Firefox worth choosing on desktop.
  • Mozilla declines to implement several hardware-facing APIs on principle, including WebUSB, WebSerial, Web Bluetooth and WebHID, so a web application that talks to a device simply does not run and no configuration flag changes that.
  • Enterprise management is limited to policies.json and ADMX templates; there is no first-party equivalent of Chrome Browser Cloud Management, so fleet-wide reporting on versions and extensions requires third-party tooling you have to buy or build.
  • Mozilla repeatedly ships decisions its own user base objects to, such as enabling Privacy Preserving Attribution by default and the 2025 Terms of Use rewrite, and reversals arrive after the news cycle, so deploying it on a privacy argument means owning the communications work each time.

Pricing, plan by plan

Flowable

Free
  • Flowable Open SourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines
    • Embeddable Java library or standalone apps
    • No modelling studio or enterprise applications
  • Flowable Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Modelling studio, work application and admin console
    • Connectors, forms and advanced identity management
    • Support with SLA and version maintenance

Mozilla Firefox

Free

No published plan breakdown. See the Mozilla Firefox review.

Which should you pick?

Choose Flowable if

  • You need bpmn 2.0 engine.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want cmmn case management.
Flowable review

Choose Mozilla Firefox if

  • You need gecko engine.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android.
  • You also want full webrequest blocking.
Mozilla Firefox review

Questions people ask

Is Flowable or Mozilla Firefox better?
Neither clearly leads. Flowable starts at Free and Mozilla Firefox at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Flowable or Mozilla Firefox?
Flowable starts at Free and Mozilla Firefox at Free.
Does Flowable or Mozilla Firefox run on more platforms?
Flowable runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Mozilla Firefox runs on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android.
Can I use Flowable for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Flowable best used for?
Flowable is most often used for an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it, a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform, a team leaving activiti or jbpm that wants the same api family with active commercial maintenance, a regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisors. Of those, an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it and a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform are not what Mozilla Firefox is typically brought in for.
What can Flowable do that Mozilla Firefox cannot?
Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, CMMN case management, DMN decision tables, Spring Boot integration. Mozilla Firefox covers Gecko engine, Full webRequest blocking, Total Cookie Protection, Container tabs.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Flowable: Is Flowable open source?

Yes, the BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines are Apache 2.0. The modelling studio and enterprise applications are commercial.

Mozilla Firefox: Does uBlock Origin still work on Firefox?

Yes. Firefox has kept the blocking webRequest API that Chrome removed with Manifest V3, so uBlock Origin runs with its full rule set rather than the cut-down Lite version Chrome requires.

Flowable: How does it relate to Activiti and jBPM?

The same core developers built jBPM, then Activiti, then forked Activiti in 2016 to create Flowable.

Mozilla Firefox: Is Firefox on iPhone the same browser?

No. Apple's platform rules require it to use WebKit, so on iOS and iPadOS you get Firefox's interface, Sync and bookmarks on top of Safari's engine. The privacy and extension behaviour are not the same.

Flowable: What does Flowable Enterprise cost?

Nothing is published. It is quoted per deployment by the vendor.

Mozilla Firefox: How is Mozilla funded, and does that matter?

Mainly by payments for making a search engine the default, with Google as the dominant payer. It matters because it is a single-source dependency on a direct competitor, and it has been the subject of antitrust litigation whose outcome Mozilla does not control.

Flowable: Why choose it over Camunda?

CMMN case management is a first-class engine, which matters when work is exception-driven rather than a fixed sequence.

Mozilla Firefox: Can I manage it across a company fleet?

Yes, through policies.json or Windows Group Policy with the ADMX templates, and the ESR channel gives you a roughly yearly major version instead of four-weekly. There is no first-party cloud management console, so reporting needs other tooling.

Mozilla Firefox: Will every site work in it?

Most will. The exceptions cluster around sites tested only in Chrome, legacy enterprise applications, and anything using WebUSB, WebSerial, Web Bluetooth or WebHID, which Firefox does not implement at all.

Share

Related pages

More on Flowable

More on Mozilla Firefox

Keep looking

Other head to heads