KoAssist vs. amberSearch.

Breadth against depth.

amberSearch, which now trades as amber, is built as an enterprise search. Its guiding question is: where in the company does the information sit, and how do I get it in one sentence? Everything else follows from that, above all the number of connectors. Anyone who wants to bring together Confluence, Salesforce, the DMS and their accounting system needs exactly that breadth, and more than seventy sources is a different ambition from seven.

KoAssist is not built as a search but as a specialist tool for one department. Its guiding question is: which rule applies here, and where does it say so? The difference shows wherever a document is more than text. A drawing has dimensions, tolerances and a title block; a standard has a section numbering that an assessor cites. A system that has to fit sixty applications at once cannot interpret those structures for each of them.

That is why the difference does not lie in data protection, even though in this market the subject usually comes up first. Both host in Germany and the EU, both work to ISO 27001, neither trains on customer data. Anyone comparing at that level will find no difference and should instead ask who in the company is actually searching.

When is amberSearch the better choice?

When it is not only engineering that searches. A tool that serves sales, service and HR as well is the more sensible purchase than two systems for two departments. KoAssist deliberately covers only one and will not change that.

When the price has to be known before the conversation. amberSearch publishes its plans and offers a thirty-day trial without a credit card. With us it starts with a conversation, because every document base looks different. For a procurement process that needs three comparable quotes that is the worse start, and there is no excuse for it.

When the knowledge sits in applications we do not connect to. Confluence, Salesforce, accounting, the DMS: more than seventy connectors against our seven. In a company whose knowledge is spread across such systems, breadth decides, and then it wins on merit.

When is KoAssist the better choice?

When the bottleneck sits in engineering. For standards, drawings and design guidelines we have dedicated modules rather than a search that does a little of everything. Anyone working daily in section numbers and dimensions notices the difference in result quality.

When CAD and PDM are part of it. Autodesk Vault and SOLIDWORKS PDM are dedicated connectors here; no CAD, PDM or PLM system is named on amber's integrations page. If a relevant share of the documents sits there, this point decides on its own.

When the team stays below fifty people. With amber, search is only included from the Business plan upwards, which requires fifty users. KoAssist can be introduced for a single engineering team, because it is cut for one department anyway.

Forty employees, twelve of them in engineering

A special machinery builder with forty employees wants to stop the searching. Twelve people sit in engineering, the rest spread across sales, purchasing, service and administration. The knowledge sits in SharePoint, on two network drives, in Outlook, in the Vault and in the finance department's DMS.

The obvious calculation points to amberSearch: one system for everyone, a known price, a trial without a contract. On closer inspection it tips at one point. Search is only included from the Business plan upwards, and that requires fifty users. With forty people the company lands on the Starter plan, that is chat and agents without the search that prompted the whole exercise.

For the twelve in engineering the question looks different. Their bottleneck is standards, drawings and whether a drawing complies with their own design guidelines. The Vault is part of that, and no connector for it is named on amber's integrations page.

An honest outcome for this company is therefore often: KoAssist for engineering, because that is where the measurable time loss sits, and postpone the company-wide search until headcount passes fifty. A company already above fifty whose engineering works without a PDM should decide the other way round.