The project dashboard is a free tool that is only available to verified hoteliers to make adopting new technology easier by streamlining their research and simplifying their communication workflow.
摘要
我们分析了 57 条经验证的酒店从业者评价,比较了功能集、定价和真实案例研究,以全面解析每个平台的优势。最佳选择取决于您的物业类型和优先事项:
Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] 表现出色 .
Counter 表现出色 在 ease of use and customer support 方面 ,拥有独特功能如 Payment processing and Housekeeping module.
基于 HTR 上 57 条经验证的酒店从业者评价的并排评分。
| HTScore |
|
|
| 推荐可能性 |
|
|
| 易用性 |
|
|
| 客户支持 |
|
|
| 性价比 |
|
|
| 起始价格 | Contact sales | Contact sales |
| 经验证的评价 | 0 | 57 |
在分析了 57 条经验证的评价后,Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] 用户最看重其 ,而 Counter 用户则强调 用户界面和可用性, 客户支持, 自动化功能。点击任意主题查看评价者的反馈。
| Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|---|
| 优点 | |
|
+
用户界面和可用性
▾
|
|
|
+
客户支持
▾
|
|
|
+
自动化功能
▾
|
|
|
+
平台集成
▾
|
|
| 缺点 | |
|
−
错误问题
▾
|
|
|
−
报告和收入管理
▾
|
|
|
−
价格
▾
|
|
各产品在不同物业规模、类型和区域的 物业管理系统 供应商中的排名——基于各细分市场中酒店从业者的经验证评价。
按酒店规模
| 细分市场 | Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|---|---|
| 小型(10-24 间客房) ▾ | — | #26 28 条评价 |
| 中型(25-74 间客房) | — | #46 4 条评价 |
| 大型(75-199 间客房) | — | #32 2 条评价 |
| 超大型(200+ 间客房) | — | #31 1 条评价 |
按物业类型
| 细分市场 | Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|---|---|
| 精品酒店 ▾ | — | #31 16 条评价 |
| 豪华酒店 | — | #44 4 条评价 |
| 品牌/连锁酒店 | — | #43 4 条评价 |
| 长住酒店 ▾ | — | #32 5 条评价 |
按区域
| 细分市场 | Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|---|---|
| 北美 ▾ | — | #25 8 条评价 |
| 欧洲 ▾ | — | #20 25 条评价 |
| 亚太 | — | #16 4 条评价 |
| 中东 | — | #11 2 条评价 |
Choosing between Cambridge PMS by Shiji and Counter hinges on your hotel’s specific operational needs and what features matter most to your team. Both aim to streamline property management, but they differ significantly in scope, user experience, and regional focus. If your hotel requires a broad, feature-rich PMS with extensive integrations, Counter stands out due to its higher ratings and more recent reviews. Conversely, Cambridge PMS's limited review data makes it harder to assess, but the absence of recent feedback suggests less confidence in its current performance.
Are you prioritizing a product with proven recent user satisfaction, or are you exploring options with a broader feature set but limited recent feedback?
Counter currently holds a sizable lead with a 4.73/5 overall rating based on 54 reviews, most recent within the last six months, and a 91% likelihood to recommend. Its wide regional presence and active user base, especially among hostels, reinforce its reliability and popularity. Cambridge PMS has no recent reviews or ratings, which raises concerns about ongoing support and development. Given this, Counter emerges as the more trusted and tested option for most hoteliers.
If your hotel values recent, high-rated reviews and active support, Counter is the better pick. If you are considering a more traditional PMS with a niche market focus, Cambridge may still have potential but with less data to confirm its effectiveness.
Counter has a 4.6/5 ease of use rating from over 50 recent reviews, praised for its intuitive interface, quick onboarding, and mobile accessibility—users say it's "easy to learn" and "simple to understand." Support staff are noted for their responsiveness, often resolving issues within minutes. Conversely, Cambridge PMS's support ratings and review count are unavailable, making it difficult to gauge the user experience. The lack of recent reviews suggests lower confidence in its current ease of adoption.
Edge: Counter.
Counter offers 19 features, including a channel manager, payment processing, booking engine, automated night audit, guest CRM, multi-currency, multi-lingual support, and more. These features are tailored primarily for hostels and small hotels, aiming to automate and integrate daily tasks. Cambridge PMS, by comparison, offers no unique or listed features, making it unclear what specific functionalities it provides or how it compares operationally. This significant feature gap favors Counter for comprehensive property management.
Edge: Counter.
Counter scores a 4.96/5 for customer support based on recent reviews, with users applauding its quick, helpful responses, especially from team members like Evelyn and Max. Support is also described as "very responsive" and "always reachable." Meanwhile, Cambridge PMS has no recent support ratings or reviews, which raises uncertainty about its current level of customer service. The consistent praise for Counter’s support makes it the clear winner here.
Edge: Counter.
Counter boasts seven verified integrations, including Stripe, WuBook, FLYR Hospitality, SiteMinder, Cloudbeds, Channex, and Goki, allowing seamless connections with payment, channel management, and access control platforms. Cambridge PMS has only one verified partner, Duetto, limiting its integration scope. For hotels seeking flexibility with multiple platform integrations, Counter offers more options and proven connections.
Edge: Counter.
Counter's user ratings reflect high satisfaction among hostel properties, averaging 4.75/5 across 52 reviews, with recent feedback praising ease of use and automation. Cambridge PMS has no recent reviews or ratings, making it impossible to assess user sentiment or satisfaction levels. The active, positive feedback for Counter underscores its trusted position among small property operators.
Edge: Counter.
Both products do not list explicit pricing details, implying they may require direct inquiry for quotes or are potentially free with paid add-ons. Counter's free-to-use core features are attractive for budget-conscious hostels, but additional modules may incur costs. Cambridge PMS’s lack of pricing transparency makes it difficult to compare cost-effectiveness directly.
Not ideal if:
Not ideal if:
Counter’s core strength is its active, recent user base and a broad feature set tailored for hostels and small hotels, which translates into high confidence in its performance. Its robust support, multiple integrations, and positive reviews make it the safer choice for most hoteliers today.
Cambridge PMS, with no recent review data and limited features, appears less proven and less aligned with modern hotel operations. Unless your property operates in a very specific niche or region, Counter is the clear winner.
Choose Counter if you want a well-supported, feature-rich platform with proven recent satisfaction. Opt for Cambridge PMS only if you have highly specialized needs and are comfortable with limited recent feedback and unknown support levels.
物业管理系统 的定价很少是简单明了的。以下是我们从各供应商公开定价数据中了解到的信息。请务必根据您的物业规模申请定制报价。
| Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|
根据 HTR 的产品数据库,Cambridge PMS 和 Counter 共享 0 项功能。以下是关键差异——一方拥有而另一方缺少的功能。
| 功能 | Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] |
|
|---|---|---|
| RevPaR 和 ADR 报告 | ||
| 交付过程 | ||
| 日历视图 | ||
| 自定义费率 | ||
| 预订引擎 | ||
| 频道管理员 |
显示主要差异。这两款产品之间还有 7 项功能存在差异。
酒店从业者喜爱的方面
酒店经营者认为 Counter 的界面简洁、直观且用户友好,便于快速培训新员工。移动和桌面界面运行良好,允许管理人员远程处理任务。它尤其以日历和日历管理的简单... 酒店经营者认为 Counter 的界面简洁、直观且用户友好,便于快速培训新员工。移动和桌面界面运行良好,允许管理人员远程处理任务。它尤其以日历和日历管理的简单性而著称。
Counter 的支持团队因其响应迅速和乐于助人而经常受到称赞。Evelyn 和 Max 等员工因其专业精神而受到特别表扬。然而,有人担心某些时区的支持速度较慢。
用户对 Counter 的自动化功能非常满意,其中包括非接触式登记入住、自动信用卡收费以及跨平台管理预订等任务。这种自动化功能减少了员工工作量并提高了运营效率... 用户对 Counter 的自动化功能非常满意,其中包括非接触式登记入住、自动信用卡收费以及跨平台管理预订等任务。这种自动化功能减少了员工工作量并提高了运营效率。
酒店从业者提出异议的方面
几位酒店老板提到系统中存在持续存在的错误,尤其是超额预订、床位显示和取消预订时的系统错误等问题。这些错误对日常运营和客人体验产生了负面影响。
酒店经营者对 Counter 的报告功能表示赞赏,但指出报告可以改进,以便提供更好的见解。收入管理功能被认为不足,特别是对于采用多种房价计划或使用动态定价的企... 酒店经营者对 Counter 的报告功能表示赞赏,但指出报告可以改进,以便提供更好的见解。收入管理功能被认为不足,特别是对于采用多种房价计划或使用动态定价的企业而言。
独特功能
评分差异最大的方面
这取决于您的需求。Cambridge PMS 和 Counter 共享许多核心 Property Management Systems 功能,但各有独特的能力。Cambridge PMS 提供 1 个经验证的集成合作伙伴,而 Counter 提供 7 个。在切换之前,请查看上方的功能对比以了解它们的差异。
小型酒店应优先考虑易用性和快速入职。Counter 在易用性方面领先,评分为 4.6/5 对比 0.0/5。寻找透明定价以及试用或演示选项。在各产品页面上按物业规模筛选评价,了解与您类似的酒店的反馈。
Cambridge PMS:否。Counter:否。 两款产品目前均不提供免费版。大多数 Property Management Systems 供应商提供演示或试用——在做出承诺之前,请分别向各供应商申请体验。
HT Score 是一个综合排名,考虑 4 个标准组和十多个变量,帮助酒店从业者客观比较酒店科技产品。Cambridge PMS [by Shiji] 的 HT Score 为 0,Counter 的为 17。以下是评分的计算方式。
| 标准组 | 权重 | 衡量内容 |
|---|---|---|
| 客户评分与评价 |
|
用户对该产品的推荐度如何? 评分分数、评价数量、声量份额、评价深度、评价时效性、成功案例 ▾ 权重最高的因素。分析平均满意度评分(推荐可能性、易用性、支持、投资回报率)、相对于同类产品的评价总数、评价时效性(最近 6 个月内至少 20 条评价)以及跨独立酒店客户的声量份额以检测选择偏差。 |
| 合作伙伴生态系统 |
|
技术合作伙伴对该公司的推荐度如何? 合作伙伴推荐、集成数量、集成质量 ▾ 评估合作伙伴推荐作为专家信心投票、经验证集成的数量以及生态系统质量——集成合作伙伴的平均 HT Score。拥有更高质量集成生态系统的产品更有可能提供互联互通的技术栈。 |
| 以客户为中心 |
|
该组织以客户为中心的程度如何? 认证支持、评价一致性、资料完整性 ▾ 评估公司是否获得 HTR 客户支持认证、是否保持持续的评价收集(反馈驱动文化的指标)以及产品资料是否完整,包括功能、截图、定价和特性。 |
| 覆盖范围、持久力与资源 |
|
该公司的覆盖范围和资源有多广泛? 地理覆盖、持久力、公司资源、趋势评分 ▾ 衡量全球覆盖(服务的国家和区域)、经营年限作为稳定性指标、团队规模作为资源指标,以及基于近十二个月买家咨询、评价、合作伙伴推荐和媒体活动的趋势评分。 |
客户评分和评价是 HT Score 算法中最重要的因素。HTR 不接受付费以提高排名。所有评价均经过验证——只有经确认从属关系的酒店行业从业者才能提交评分。 查看完整 HT Score 评估方法 →
产品推荐顾问