OpenText MBPM vs webMethods.io comparison

"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."

"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 most valuable feature of webMethods Integration Server is all the capabilities it provides. We leverage most of the features, that they have offered to us. Our vendor has made some additional features on top of the webMethods Integration Server and we use all the features together."

"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."

"The messaging part is the most valuable feature."

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

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

"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."

"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."

"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."

"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."

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

"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."

"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."

"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."

"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."

"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."

"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."

"The orchestration is not as good as it should be."

"There is an annual license to use OpenText MBPM."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cost-efficient, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing somewhere between nine and ten since it is a costly solution."

"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."

"Its cost depends on the use cases."

"Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."

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

"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."

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

"The product is very expensive."

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