Mule ESB vs OpenESB comparison

"Most of our use cases are for Salesforce. So, the connectors for Salesforce have been really helpful. They've made development two times faster."

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

"It is easily deployable and manageable. It has microservices-based architecture, which means that you can deploy the solution based on your needs, and you can manage the solution very easily."

"Once it is started, we don't see any problems on a day to day basis."

"The solution's drag-and-drop interface and data viewer helped us quite a lot."

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

"The architecture based on events has several connectors which allow integration from external and internal applications of the company."

"The setup is straightforward."

"The process-oriented solution allows you to define choreography and orchestration."

"OpenESB pushes the organization to clearly define service boundaries and interfaces. So it motives the business and the development teams to clearly define their business services and processes they want to implement. OpenESB supports fine and coarse-grain granularity for the services and supports top-down and bottom-up approaches for the services, processes definition, and composition."

"One of the most valuable features is being able to implement business processes while keeping track of the design from BPMN to a BPEL Implementation."

"The core is very stable."

"There's room for improvement in multi-file transfer functionality. It's not convenient when using MuleSoft, and it should have better capability for handling large amounts of data. For example, applications like GoAnywhere can handle huge chunks of data, so the tool should also have something to facilitate that aspect of integration."

"The stability could be improved."

"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."

"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."

"The price of Mule ESB could improve."

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

"In an upcoming release, I would like to see more additional concept for exception handling, batch processing, and increased integration with other application."

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

"The documentation needs to be better."

"The documentation of the product must be improved. It could be tricky to find the right documentation on a topic since the documentation is spread in many places. I advise the new joiner to contact the community to get entry points and additional documentation. Tutorial and Video must be present to take up the product."

"Cloud deployment is weak and needs to be improved."

"Regarding its management, a web console being able to synchronize distributed instances would be great."

"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 pricing must be improved."

"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."

"Mule ESB is a costly solution. We pay approximately $80,000 annually for the system. The cost of the number of instances, annual subscription, and cloud hosting services are expensive."

"This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."

"The various features and components for this solution are no longer free."

"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."

"The Community Edition is a full product you can use in production, it does not have limitations like other alternatives."

"There are two versions. The first is the community version, which is free and contains the last part of the feature, but if you want to get the Enterprise version, you'll have to pay €60,000 which covers support and two instances on production."

"The cost for the prediction instrument is high because it is charged per instances based on prediction, but the rest of the solution is free."