FME vs webMethods.io comparison

"It has standard plug-ins available for different data sources."

"It has a very friendly user interface. You don't need to use a lot of code. For us that's the most important aspect about it. Also, it has a lot of connectors and few forms. It has a strong facial aspect. It can do a lot of facial analysis."

"From my reseller perspective, the best features in FME are the ease of operation and the fact that it works."

"All spatial features are unrivaled, and the possibility to execute them based on a scheduled trigger, manual, e-mail, Websocket, tweet, file/directory change or virtually any trigger is most valuable."

"We make minor subtle changes to the workbenches to improve it. We can share the workbenches. We don't have to use GitHub or anything else."

"The most valuable feature of FME is the graphical user interface. There is nothing better. It is very easy to debug because you can see all steps where there are failures. Overall the software is easy to optimize a process."

"FME is spatially aware and understands how to deal with the conversion of spatial objects and their attributes."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a stable solution."

"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."

"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."

"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."

"The solution is scalable."

"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."

"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."

"I like the tool's scalability."

"To get a higher rating, it would have to improve the price and the associated scalability. These are the main issues."

"Improvements could be made to mapping presentations."

"FME's price needs improvement for the African market."

"FME can improve the geographical transformation. I've had some problems with the geographical transformations, but it's probably mostly because I'm not the most skilled geographer in-house. The solution requires some in-depth knowledge to perform some functions."

"We are looking at the possibility of using Glue instead of FME, using the native AWS product."

"The one thing that always appears in the community is the ability to make really easy loops to loop through data efficiently. That needs to be added at some point."

"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."

"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."

"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."

"One area that needs improvement is the version upgrade process. Many customers I've worked with encounter challenges when transitioning from their current version, such as x or 9, to a newer version. The process is not smooth, and they must shift their entire website."

"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."

"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."

"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."

"The deployment should be simplified."

"We used the standard licensing for our use of FME. The cost was approximately €15,000 annually. We always welcome less expensive solutions, if the solution could be less expensive it would be helpful."

"The product's price is reasonable."

"FME Server used to cost £10,000; now it can cost over £100,000."

"Its cost depends on the use cases."

"The pricing is a yearly license."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."

"It is worth the cost."

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

"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."

"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."