IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs webMethods.io comparison

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

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

"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."

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

"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."

"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."

"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."

"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."

"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."

"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"

"The core product can be used not only for automatic file transfers between applications, but also as an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)."

"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."

"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."

"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."

"webMethods Integration Server is an easy-to-use solution and does not require a lot of coding."

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

"The installation configuration is quite difficult."

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

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

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

"It is currently a weighty product."

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

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

"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."

"This is a great solution and the vendor could improve the marketing of the solution to be able to reach more clients."

"The price has room for improvement."

"It could be more user-friendly."

"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"

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

"The solution's release management feature could be better."

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

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

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

"The solution is expensive."

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

"This product is more expensive than competing products."

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

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

"The solution is expensive."

"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."

"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."

"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."

"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."

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

"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."

"The solution’s pricing is too high."

"I would like to see better pricing for the license."