IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs webMethods.io comparison

"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."

"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."

"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."

"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."

"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."

"Straightforward development and deployment."

"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."

"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."

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

"The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation."

"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."

"It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console."

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

"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."

"The performance is good."

"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."

"As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordingly."

"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."

"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."

"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."

"The solution can add container engines such as docker."

"The installation configuration is quite difficult."

"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."

"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."

"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."

"It would be nice if they had a change management system offering. We built our own deployer application because the one built into webMethods couldn't enforce change management rules. Integration into a change management system, along with the version control system, would be a good offering; it's something that they're lacking."

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

"The products, at the moment, are new and there should perhaps be support for the older version of the protocols."

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

"Scalability and connectors to different cloud applications is lacking."

"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."

"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"

"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"

"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."

"This product is more expensive than competing products."

"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."

"The solution is expensive."

"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."

"The solution is expensive."

"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."

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

"It is worth the cost."

"Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."

"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."

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

"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."

"I do think webMethods is coming under increasing pressure when it comes to their price-to-feature value proposition. It's probably the single biggest strategic risk they have. They're very expensive in their industry. They've been raising the price recently, especially when compared with their competitors."

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