Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io comparison

"Very effective with its drag-and-drop feature."

"The product's integration features are quite rich and low code. It is easy to use."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"Extremely flexible for any kind of integration between systems."

"This is a fairly easy-to-use tool for integration which can be self-taught for those with a bit of a technical background."

"The platform is user-friendly."

"It's very user-friendly and designed to be easy to use for the end user."

"This solution has a user-friendly interface and very good documentation with solutions that helped us in working with the tool efficiently."

"I like the tool's scalability."

"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."

"High throughput and excellent scalability."

"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."

"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."

"It is a very stable product."

"The solution has a very comprehensive and versatile set of connectors. I've been able to utilize it for multiple, different mechanisms. We do a lot of SaaS and we do have IoT devices and the solution is comprehensive in those areas."

"The Software AG Designer has been great. It's very intuitive."

"We encountered stability issues occasionally, one to two times a year."

"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."

"There are more mature (dedicated) API management and master data management (MDM) solutions available in the market."

"There is no validation in the mapping profile custom scripting, such as IntelliSense or advanced error checking."

"The solution is complex. There's a few items and features that are hard to understand. They should work to simplify the functionality so new users don't struggle."

"In day-to-day operations, tracking transactions is a major challenge. It takes hours to track a single transaction. It is not a straightforward process."

"The deployment was simple, but the implementation is missing a lot of capabilities."

"It crashes if we run high-volume integration."

"webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience."

"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."

"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."

"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."

"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."

"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."

"Technical support is an area where they can improve."

"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"They do not charge by the number of people using the software (client-server model), but rather they charge based on the number of connections used. This makes it very cost effective."

"The licensing model of Dell Boomi is based on a ‘pay-per-use’ model."

"The Platinum package is good for licensing, but I’m not sure about the cost and improvements."

"The cost of the solution is in the neighborhood of $20,000 annually. There are no costs above the standard licensing fee."

"When it comes to pricing, it's not so much about being less expensive as it is about how they don't tie to the hardware on the underlined VMware that you run on, as other vendors do"

"This solution is very economical (based on the connections)."

"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is a relatively cheap and cost-effective product compared to other products like SAP or Oracle."

"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."

"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."

"I am not involved in the licensing side of things."

"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."

"It is a cost-effective solution."

"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."