Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) Reviews

I use the solution for preparing the data according to the data quality rules.

The mapping and mapplet features are valuable. The product improves data quality. The processes are running smoothly. The interface is good. Data integration is easy.

I use the solution to integrate on-premise and cloud products. There are issues with connectors to cloud applications. The integration process is not easy. The customer experience must be improved. When we implemented it, we did it with the help of Informatica professionals. I would not recommend them as an implementer. They didn't have any experience. It was very hard. The customer experience was not good. It's hard to understand the new features of the HR list. The tool must have more options for connectors. It is hard to connect to some of the applications. The remediation process is not straightforward.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a six out of ten. It is a bit complex to scale. We have 20 users.

The technical support is not good. The support team must improve the quality of support.

The product is cloud-based.

We got a 50% discount.

We couldn’t deliver the full project. I will not recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

It is used for our SharePoint data, and it is used for our financial data, so we prepare some kind of data lakes about data. And for a lot of financial things. For example, when somebody has to put the user, like, what we have in your organization. You have a user, and some joint venture partners are there. So, we use it for multiple financial master data. Basically, financial master data, we use it.

We are basically partners, IT partners because a lot of data is being used in multiple applications for Informatica. So, basically, we have partners. It's like Shell. So, it's an end user, but as well as a partner.

It's helpful in integration, and it can be moved around in SharePoint.  So, from the SharePoint View, data integration and reporting, it help a lot in that way.

The speed with which the data should be moved could be improved because of the firewall. It's becoming quite slow. And the integration with Teams or with Microsoft is not so smooth. So these are the areas of improvement. 

So, probably, they might even look for some upgrades or some changes over there. But these are the two key areas that we are facing issues with. One is the data moves a bit slow, and the integration within Microsoft products.

Maintenance is another issue that takes a lot of time and money. It can be a challenge in the long term.

I have been using this solution for six to seven years. 

It is stable, I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. Because of the maintenance issue, we want to scale it up, but we're not able to do so because of the maintenance issue and delayed response.

It breaks down quite often, and it takes time and money to get the issue fixed. These are challenges that need to be addressed from a global perspective, not just from my process.

The support from IBM might not be good, or the IBM people might have to contact Informatica for the solution. That could be a reason. But the resolution takes longer than expected.

There is room for improvement in the support. The response time could be faster. 

Neutral

It is easy to install because our laptops come pre-configured. There were no issues. However, it is not easy to maintain. 

We have a team that IBM handles for maintenance work. If there are issues, we raise a ticket, and they get sorted out, but it takes too long. It is not quick enough. The resolution takes more time than expected. 

We saw an ROI. We have been able to get data from various sources and consolidate it into a data lake, which is helping us in data analytics. This aligns with our company's initiative to implement a data lake strategy and drive digital transformation.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

In my company, we use Informatica Cloud Data Integration because I work in the insurance sector, where we use the tool for data migration from one environment to another. We also use Informatica Cloud Data Integration in scenarios where the clients switch from their legacy system to Informatica Cloud using Azure Synapse, because of which we have to migrate all the data to Azure Synapse.

The most valuable features of the solution are pushdown, optimization, and partitioning, which can be used for frequent data loading, especially when we have a huge data volume in our company.

While my company operates on the cloud, we have seen that Informatica Cloud Data Integration has some performance issues causing it to lag. I feel that Informatica is still in the process of improving its cloud. Sometimes, there are connectivity shoes in the product causing it to have multiple issues, because of which the solution hangs or lags. The product may have issues because they are new to the market and are trying to improve their services.

I have been using Informatica Cloud Data Integration for two years. 

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

The solution can be easily scaled up since we just need to take the aid of some PIM processor and increase the data volume as per what we want.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I have an experience of more than ten years with Informatica PowerCenter.

Informatica Cloud Data Integration's on-premises version is very good, considering the faster performance and efficiency it provides. Informatica Cloud Data Integration's cloud version is also getting enhanced since Informatica has been regularly doing some patching to increase the product's performance. Considering the current scenario, Informatica PowerCenter is a good product, especially its on-premises version.

The deployment doesn't take much time, and only a few minutes are needed to deploy the solution.

I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is the cheapest and ten is the most expensive. The product is a bit expensive.

In the cloud, Informatica has migrated to a different environment in a single platform named IDMC, on which one can have cloud data migration, cloud application integration, data quality, and data governance, making everything combined with a single platform. Earlier in our company, we had to rely on different software or platforms for each functionality, but now we can use a single URL and work on a single platform.

I would like to speak about Informatica Cloud Data Integration's performance, which is too slow but works overall as a tool. To those planning to use Informatica Cloud, I would say that it is the second-best product in the marketplace, and soon it will become the leading product.

On a daily basis, the product has been increasing their overall availability and performance .On a weekly basis, the product gives out some new updates while fixing its old defects. It will be a good product in the coming years. Improvements in the current product will continue for some time.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

We use Informatica Cloud Data Integration because we have multiple sources for data integration, and we transform that data and load it into the database or QuickBooks.

There are fewer than 10 people using this solution in my organization.

I'm an integrator. I'm working with the latest version. 

It's deployed on cloud.

Data integration is the most valuable feature. The ability to connect to any of the sources and enterprise applications makes our lives easier.

We would like to have accessibility to the repository. We had that feature in Informatica PowerCenter, and we were able to have access to the repository query, which helped us build some tools, audit tools, and review tools. In Informatica Cloud, accessing the repository query is a challenge.

I have used this solution for about six years.

It's very stable.

It's scalable. 

We reach out to technical support frequently. We've had good experiences with them.

We previously used PowerCenter, DataStage, and Oracle Data Integrator.

I prefer Informatica Cloud Data Integration because of the ease of connecting to various connectors and various enterprise applications. The UI is also a valuable feature.

Initial setup isn't straightforward or complex. It's about medium difficulty. 

Deployment took about one week. It's not difficult to maintain.

Deployment was done in-house.

From the usage perspective, there is minimum ROI.

The pricing is high compared to other tools on the market.

We chose Informatica Cloud because we have Salesforce. If you're using Data Integration, App Integration, and many other features like operational insights, then the price is worth it. If you're only using the solution for data integration, then the price definitely isn't worth it.

We were trying to publish a compendium of all our various assets using an Oracle-based data warehouse. We also had vendor-based solutions like Epic for electronic medical records on an SQL Server base. We had many research systems on various platforms because it's a cancer research institution. 

We wanted to pull together a comprehensive data catalog to show people all the different assets we had and where they could go to find things. If there were vendor-based definitions of things, we'd pull in the definitions and various attributes. It's a heterogeneous environment data-wise. We get a lot of value from a comprehensive enterprise catalog.

It's available on our intranet through a data governance portal. You could go there for a catalog, quality reports, etc. In a year, there may have been 500 unique visitors. It was my job to publicize it, but I didn't necessarily do a good job. I worked with research groups and clinicians to get their stuff on it, and they would tell other people about it. The nice thing about Informatica is that it was easy to link from our internal web portal to their catalog. I had excellent developers working for me. It didn't require much development, and it took less and less as time went on. 

I like EDC's self-service capabilities. You can put the catalog on the intranet inside the organization, so users can search for something. People in the research world have specialized systems, and you might find data from various places that sound similar. 

The purpose of the Enterprise Data Catalog was to build an internally searchable catalog of stuff. You may not have permission to see this data but at least you could find out where it was and contact the person who owns it. 

Interoperability is one area where EDC has room for improvement. It was challenging when the faculty took over the data world and had specific vendors they wanted to use, and some were not particularly open platforms. 

It was a challenge to promote data visibility while also jumping through hoops to take some of the proprietary things and make them part of the calling, especially when the vendor doesn't necessarily support interoperability. You need to export things from a vendor program and import them again. 

We used Informatica for a lot of the data governance stuff I worked with when I joined the company, including things like cataloging and profiling data. The organization has really changed a lot in the last year and went with Informatica EDC. They're moving from the on-prem version to the cloud.

Informatica is a strong company, and EDC is a solid platform. 

The scalability is excellent. Informatica really knows what it's doing. They're smart people and great engineers. 

Informatica's customer service and support were decent. They listen to their customers. If something is missing or wasn't working, they will put it on their roadmap. They were listening to customers for roadmap stuff. 

We wound up building a staging database to pull stuff out of the EDC, stage it, and then access that. It was open, so we would often have an intermediary layer at Oracle. If we wanted to show, for example, data quality over time, we would have a weekly quality process that would run. We staged that in an Oracle database, and the portal could access that.

We had to build Informatica pipelines and do some Azure work to feed data to them. With data warehousing, you typically have static data that is timestamped daily or weekly and sometimes monthly or annually.  We were trying to get real-time data, like blood pressure monitoring and stuff like that. That was a lot of work. I didn't do it. The integration team. 

When I joined the company, it was an Oracle-based solution. Then Epic took over, which was SQL Server-based. After that, they went to Azure. Now, all the analytics are supposed to be on this platform, and it's not particularly open. 

Setting up Informatica EDC is usually pretty straightforward. The challenge is working with vendors like Oracle and Microsoft, which have APIs for integrating things. You can query what they have. They want it to play well with other vendors because they know customers don't only have one brand of product. In some cases, you get vendors in there that are, "No, we're not going to do that because we're so special." It was a challenge. The platform of choice for data initiatives at the cancer research institution is Palantir. 

We didn't look for an alternative, but Azure has its own catalog.

I rate Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog nine out of 10. It's a great solution, and I was happy with it. It did everything I wanted, and Informatica dramatically increased the integration points over time. When we started, it was like Oracle and SQL Server, but now they're adding NoSQL databases and others.

Informatica has user groups and listens to user input. One of the people that worked for me hosts an annual Informatica user group in Houston. You can try to build your own Oracle-based or SQL-based solution. They listened to the market, and they're working on improving the interoperability. Maybe it works better with Palantir since I left, but they work across all platforms. They're making it Cloud-based. I didn't know anything about them before I got here. I was dropped into a department where Informatica had been for at least five or six years, and it was a good choice.

We essentially use Informatica Axon to set up a data governance framework for a corporation, usually a medium-sized or large organization.

The dictionary, the search, and the ratings are without a doubt the most beneficial components of this solution. 

Socializing data governance is one of the examples, but I'm not sure what the others were. For instance, if you locate a specific data attribute, you can grade its accuracy by assigning it a star rating between 0 and 5. 

When someone else conducts a search, they might discover whether employees at the company believe the data to be of high quality.

In terms of additional features, I believe it is quite rich. As I previously stated, it is a fairly mature product.

The main issue probably has nothing to do with end users, but installation can definitely be simplified. Also, I believe that this is something that they are already working on it, but it needs to be provided as a service. 

The Microsoft version, Purview, is now available as a cloud service, it must be provided as a service rather than just installation. You do not need to go through the installation, you literally create an account in five minutes. That is something they need to do. I believe that it is already something they are on working on, but I don't believe it has yet been released.

Over the past year, I have definitely used Informatica Axon.

I have worked with Informatica Axon for two years.

We are always working with the latest version.

Informatica Axon is a stable product.

It's a fairly mature product. For many years, it has been the market leader.

Informatica Axon is a scalable solution.

The smallest organization would have 500 users.

Any of the multinational corporations could be the largest. It's quite pricey. 

It is commonly used by large multinational corporations.

It has two or three user interfaces, one for everyone in the organization, one for specific data analysts, and one for IT technical staff.

Like many organizations, technical support responds quickly at times. It can take some time. It's about average, in my opinion. I wouldn't say it's particularly good or bad. It's average.

I would rate the technical support a three and a half out of five.

Neutral

I am just really familiar with Azure DevOps as a deployment technology.

Some of the Azure services, such as Database and Purview, and Informatica tools, such as Axon, and Data Governance, are among the things I am familiar with.

Informatica Professional Services should absolutely perform the installation due to its complexity. Additionally, training is required for end-client configuration. It is not something you can pick up and configure immediately.

Although there is no cloud version of it yet, it can be deployed in the cloud as a virtual machine, or VM.

Axon itself, you normally allow anywhere between five and ten days to conduct the installation configuration together, and that's not elapsed time. It normally takes a week to two weeks to install and configure an initial setup. This is elapsed time, not necessarily man hours. You will always need additional configuration to be done. Although the actual installation and configuration might be completed in a few weeks, getting it ready for use by the organization might take six months.

We do not have a technical team. I was the person who deployed this solution.

It was a challenge, but I did it for the POC.

Informatica Professional Services was consulted when it came time for the client's actual installation.

Axon can typically be present; the technical installation only requires one person, and a second data specialist is typically required for configuration. Normally two. Additional technical setup and data configuration are required.

It is definitely high if used properly, but many organizations spend all of the money and then fail to use it to its full potential. It is unquestionably a good investment if used properly.

It depends on how the client uses it.

Pricing is determined by the number of licensed users as well as the number of Core CPUs. 

You can imagine how expensive it would be for a company with 10,000 users, but it all depends on how many analyst user licenses they require. 

I believe there is a flat fee for the end user. 

It is not expensive, but individual licenses are required for technical users, data analysts, data stewards, and the data governance team, which can add up if you have a large number of them.

Different clients may have different licensing costs, but it is based on a yearly paid license. It is renewed every year. There is an initial licensing fee as well as an annual renewal fee.

They are very expensive, and they charge a lot because they know they are number one. I would rate them a five out of five. Five being the most expensive.

I would definitely recommend it. If they can afford it. I strongly advise them to use it. But, before diving into Axon or any of the other governance tools, make sure they understand their data landscape thoroughly because the tool will not help them with that. They will fail if they do not have good data practices in place.

I'm a freelancer, but the consultancy I went through is also independent, but they do have a partner relationship with Informatica, as they do with many vendors.

I would rate Informatica Axon a nine out of ten.

The use cases attached to Informatica MDM may vary for different industries. Suppose I talk about industries related to healthcare and life sciences. In the aforementioned scenario related to healthcare and life sciences, there have been situations where a lot of sales representatives have issues while trying to set up calls with different physicians. Informatica or any MDM solution usually helps people in the healthcare industry optimize their business processes, especially when setting up calls with different physicians. Typically, Informatica MDM helps to reduce the number of duplicate details related to a physician or the data related to a particular organization data so that the sales representatives don't end up sending duplicate call invites to the same physician, especially those physicians who have probably different versions of their own name.

I think the integration feature is probably one of the key features in Informatica MDM. When compared to other Indian products, Informatica MDM has an edge due to its integration capabilities.

I don't see any area of improvement required when it comes to Informatica MDM since it is one of the leading products in the market. Some unification in Informatica MDM's UI side would probably make it better. I find Reltio more intuitive when compared to Informatica MDM's UI. Informatica MDM's UI is not intuitive enough. Informatica MDM's UI can be made a bit more intuitive.

I think all the latest up-to-date features are made available in Informatica solution. When it comes to Informatica MDM, all the features are mostly included, because of which there is nothing that needs to be added.

The long response time taken by the technical team of Informatica can be considered for improvement.

I have experience with Informatica MDM. I currently work for a company that has an alliance partnership with Informatica. I use Informatica to develop MDM solutions for my company's clients. I work as a solution provider since my company wants its employees to work as middlemen for Informatica products. In my company, we use Informatica to build solutions for clients. I use the latest version of Informatica MDM.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a highly scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

If it is for a single region deployment, the number of users who use the solution can vary somewhere between ten to fifteen, but if it is for a global deployment, then there could be hundreds of users who would use the solution.

The solution is used on a daily basis in my organization.

If there is a super high-priority issue, then the technical team of Informatica is super responsive. However, if it is a low-priority issue, they usually take a little longer than their usual response time. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

When it comes to Informatica MDM, it is mostly a cloud or SaaS-based product, because of which the configuration or setup phases may not pose a challenge. Most of the MDM solutions are now SaaS-based products that the product vendor maintains, and so such products are mostly accessed through web URLs over the cloud. Right now, any configuration or setup is not challenging, which used to be the case several years ago when these solutions were deployed on an on-premises model, because of which installation and other such procedures were required. Currently, most products are SaaS-based solutions, so there are no such challenges with respect to setup.

I rate the initial setup phase of Informatica MDM as a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

Predominantly, Informatica MDM gets deployed on a public cloud. There is a provision to go ahead with if any of our company's clients want the product to be deployed on a private cloud, but it comes at a very high cost.

The time taken for the end-to-end deployment process depends on the complexity of the project that you are working on, but if I have to give you a standard answer, it would be approximately six months to start from scratch until production goes live.

Considering the members from the production and UAT departments, the UAT department dealt with the product for three weeks, and the overall deployment process took place over a month to a month and a half. Around eight staff members were required for the deployment process, including an Informatica developer responsible for configurations, a lead developer, two people for integration, a project manager, and one solution architect.

One of the in-house teams in my company carried out the deployment process.

I would say that the return on investment from the use of the solution is fairly good.

I rate the product's ROI a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is zero percent return on investment, and ten is one hundred percent return on investment.

I rate the product's pricing a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high price. The product does come at a certain cost since it is one of the best products in the market. The payments for the solution are made on a subscription-based model, meaning it is a pay-as-you-go model. In general, the costs attached to the solution depend on its usage.

The costs, in addition to the standard licensing fees for the solution, depend on users' requirements.

The people required for the maintenance of Informatica MDM depend upon the requirements of the clients who use the product.

I would say that a team of five people that includes a solution architect who operates in a partial capacity would be good enough to take care of Informatica MDM's maintenance phase.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for data modularization.

The solution has the best feature for parameterization. We can apply it at the mapping and task flow levels. It helps with auto-linking and dynamic linking options for flexible data integration.

The solution's capability to handle large volumes of data compared to its on-premise version needs improvement. Its features for partitioning and optimization could be better as well. There needs to be more options for partitioning, including database partitioning, pass-through partitioning, etc. Additionally, it doesn't support XML data types for SQL server databases. Also, it captures success and targets rows only within a system-defined area. It should be able to capture and track the number of rows processed by each pipeline.

Presently, users need to write code against the existing APIs to access information data. It is a complicated process due to the limited functionality of APIs. Instead, there could be an option to write queries against repository tables to fetch the data like its on-premise version.

We have been using the solution for two years.

The solution's technical support team could be responsive. We have to contact their global support team to raise new feature requests. Currently, we encounter issues with parameterizing email IDs at the task level to configure features for success, warning, and failure. We sent a request to them back in 2020, but they are yet to add those features.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.