Aurea CX Messenger vs Mule ESB comparison

"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."

"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."

"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."

"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."

"The solution offers excellent stability."

"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."

"The most valuable feature for Mule is the number of connectors that are available."

"The most valuable feature of Mule ESB is data transformation, i.e. our interacting with different systems and orchestrating for our business needs."

"This tool has exceptional API management and integration connectors in addition to multiple out of the box connectors."

"The most powerful feature is DataWeave, which is a powerful language where data can be transformed from one form into another."

"Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature."

"I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support."

"The solution has a good graphical interface."

"I am impressed with the product's connectors and scalability."

"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."

"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."

"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."

"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."

"Limitation on external subscribers to listen to the messages on the bus."

"One area that could be improved is the way that policies are propagated when APIs are moved from one environment to another. It's an issue, but when you develop and test the rest APIs in a lower environment and need to move them, there's a propagation process. This process moves certain aspects of the APIs, like the basic features. But when we move them, the policies don't always move with them. The policies should be able to move so we don't have to redo them manually. There are some APIs we use, but it's a bit tedious."

"Documentation is cryptic, product releases are far too frequent, and upgrades become troublesome."

"We would like to have a built-in logging framework in which we can do auditing."

"It would be beneficial if users could navigate the UI easily without extensive training or learning curves."

"The current version will not be supported for much longer."

"Mule ESB could be more user-friendly. I think users must learn about the architecture before they start coding. The price could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an EDIFACT integration."

"The stability could be improved."

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."

"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"

"The pricing is not so high."

"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."

"This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters."

"This is expensive. In my next project, we had to go to other vendor."

"The solution is expensive."

"Most of the challenges that I had with this solution were for smaller customers. There is not a good licensing model or pricing model. It is more expensive than other solutions, and that's the downside of MuleSoft. I had to be creative to be able to sell it to the business, but we did. This is something they have to work on because for large companies, it's affordable, but for small and medium businesses, it's very hard to sell."

"Regarding licensing and pricing, I find it somewhat flexible. They are more flexible with larger customers compared to small and medium ones, as their licensing model depends on ports and other factors. Large customers benefit from more flexibility in implementation and renewal compared to smaller ones."

"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."

"The pricing must be improved."