MuleSoft Anypoint Platform Reviews

With the Mule Anypoint Platform, we have addressed several integration scenarios. For example, when integrating systems like Workday, Oracle, ADS, and QAD, Mule Anypoint Platform has significantly improved API connectivity using its experience API system.

In another case, in the healthcare industry in North America, we faced issues with VDA transactions that occurred over two weeks. We migrated to Mule Anypoint Platform-based APIs, which included scheduling and API connectivity.

The most beneficial features for handling data integration with Mule Anypoint Platform include its ability to integrate seamlessly with other popular platforms like IBM, Dell Boomi, and Microsoft Azure. MuleSoft stands out due to its unique one-point solution for various integration problems, including application and network integration, and its iPaaS services. The

Design Center allows for designing APIs that can be made into reusable assets. Additionally, MuleSoft's capability to handle various technologies, such as Python and Java Spring Boot APIs, and monitor them using the Flex Gateway is valuable.

Regarding API management, MuleSoft offers a gateway facility, including Flex Gateway, which supports API management with robust governance capabilities. Policies like rate limiting, blocklisting, allowlisting, and client ID enforcement can all be managed through the API Manager, providing comprehensive control over API operations.

Mule Anypoint Platform should improve its pricing. In my experience, a customer using the sandbox version couldn't upgrade to the final version because it exceeded their budget.

Another area for improvement is the login mechanism. We need to integrate with third-party products for strong authentication, but it would be better if MuleSoft had its own robust login mechanism.

I have been using the Mule Anypoint Platform for the past seven years.

In terms of stability, the Mule Anypoint Platform is generally stable. Issues arise only when external factors like unstable storage or excessive database loads exist. The platform is reliable and robust, depending on how well our organization manages its resources.

Scalability is crucial in our ability to grow and manage new integrations. With both horizontal and vertical scaling options available in the cloud-based solution, it efficiently handlesincreasing workloads and processing power, supporting our growth.

Customer support from MuleSoft is essential to our operations. They provide crucial assistance post-deployment, ensuring our applications run smoothly.

Positive

The platform is easy to deploy and typically takes about three months to implement.Deployment or maintenance usually requires one architect and one DevOps person for scaling and ongoing maintenance.

Regarding pricing, I believe there could be room for improvement to align with user expectations.

Regarding AI capabilities, the Mule Anypoint Platform is evolving in that direction. While they've made strides with RPA and other AI-related features, I believe there's still progress.

Overall, I would rate Mule Anypoint Platform as nine out of ten. My recommendation to thoseconsidering it would be that if you're looking to scale your business efficiently without extensiveR&D, the Mule Anypoint Platform offers a robust solution ready for deployment, whether on-premises or in hybrid environments.

The most important thing that I have seen is it has removed the data silos because of the three-tier architecture that Mule Anypoint Platform follows.

The most valuable feature is their integrations and very good API management.

I think in the next release if they could work with the low-code platform that developers are struggling with that would be helpful. I would like to see some data integration and automation.

I have been using Mule Anypoint Platform for the past five years.

The current stability is excellent.

There is scalability but not automatic scalability. We have about one hundred and fifty individuals using the solution. We do plan to increase our current usage.

Technical support is fantastic.  

Positive

We migrated from TIBCO.

I would say the initial setup is somewhere between straightforward and complex.

We did our implementation in-house.

There is no question at all that there is a return on investment.

We checked Boomi but found that Mule Anypoint Platform was better.

I would rate Mule Anypoint Platform a nine out of ten.

We primarily use MuleSoft for integrations and API management. This involves pragmatic usage of API-led connectivity and managing complex integrations.

The platform saves implementation time and offers clear visibility of integration assets, which is crucial for managing numerous integrations in large enterprises.

The most valuable feature is the full lifecycle management, including Anypoint Designer and Exchange, as well as Discofolio API. The contract-first development approach and clear visibility of integration assets are also significant advantages.

One area for improvement is the Community Hub or developer portal, which should be part of the base offering. Additionally, MuleSoft is considered expensive, so pricing is a major concern.

We have been using Anypoint Platform for about seven years, though not continuously. I've worked on it extensively for approximately five years.

I would rate the product's stability as eight out of ten.

MuleSoft provides the ability to scale, yet it is costly to do so.

The technical support is satisfactory. They have moved to a Salesforce support model, but I do not have strong opinions on this change.

Neutral

The initial setup is somewhat complex, especially for organizations without a significant development culture, as compared to its competitors like Workato or Dell Boomi.

We relied on third-party consultants for the initial setup.

MuleSoft is considered one of the more expensive products in the market. Pricing is a major challenge and often a reason for switching to other solutions.

Dell Boomi is a main competitor, and Workato is also picking up.

I recommend MuleSoft for medium and large enterprises with complex integrations and in-house development teams.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The primary use case associated with the product is that it helps enable integrations and expose them to the front-end channels. Our company is in the process of evaluating products which can seamlessly integrate with our head office and back office systems. Also, my company has to do you with some use cases associated with the front-end part. Basically, my company is probably planning to extend the services and products in our channels.

In terms of API management, the product offers ease of API creation while exposing it as another thing. The product is also very compatible. My company is trying to create an API catalog for different services, and I think for it you need a product which offers seamless API creation and exposing capabilities.

With GenAI coming into the picture, it can be used to focus on specific setups and use cases. If you want to have an end-to-end solution, more AI infusion into the product will be beneficial. For example, when it comes to an industry-based solution, and someone approaches our company and states that they want to focus on healthcare or some financial services, we have some specific end-to-end solutions where Anypoint can be used as a backbone. If you are able to enable some AI on top of the functionalities provided by the product, it would be beneficial for users. The inclusion of GenAI in the tool can be good since it is an area that is currently unavailable in the solution. Mule Anypoint Platform can serve as a backbone when trying to build up an end-to-end solution using AI.

I have been using Mule Anypoint Platform for a year.

I think it is a scalable product, but my company has not been going for a large implementation or where there was a need to scale up. To be honest, my company has not tried out the scalability features offered by the product.

The product can be recommended to companies that are mid-sized to large-sized. As my company has not had the opportunity to test out the scalability features of the product, it won't be appropriate for me to comment on whether the product would be suitable for large enterprises, but I believe that for mid-sized enterprises, the product should be good.

My company works with an iPaaS platform like Dell Boomi. My company also uses TIBCO along with Google Apigee API Management. In the past, my company has used a product named Kong for API management and integration.

In terms of the advantages offered by Dell Boomi over Mule Anypoint Platform, I would say that it offers out-of-the-box connectors for different systems, including SAP systems, Salesforce systems, and other tools like CRM systems and ERP systems. I think Dell Boomi comes with a set of connectors, which are already in the form of a plug-and-play process. If the connectors are there, you just need to point out the source data, and in some cases, the source can be in a Salesforce system. If you ask me about Dell Boomi, it offers more in terms of its abilities related to connectors, which you can seamlessly connect to Salesforce, PeopleSoft, or any other systems. The aforementioned area consists of the details associated with Dell Boomi and the areas where it offers a differentiator.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.

The product's price seems to be competent in comparison to other products in the market. I don't think that prices are the issue associated with the solution since most of the other products are offered at a similar price point, so I don't see any difference in terms of cost or pricing.

There are multiple ways in which my company is trying to evaluate some products in the market against Mule Anypoint Platform. Google Apigee API Management is one of the products my company is considering against Mule Anypoint Platform.

When evaluating other products in the market, my company wants to be as product agnostic as possible, so in this context, I am looking at different and specific use cases that can be dealt with Mule Anypoint Platform. Some other tools may be useful in other cases. My company is trying to bring in a product-agnostic solution so t that if tomorrow a customer wants to use a tool, we need to have a clear and deep understanding of each of multiple products so that we can, when conceptualizing the solution, we will consider the best platforms based on the use cases. From a consulting standpoint, finding multiple products is a way of looking at things while not necessarily comparing a solution to another one and stating that it is a tool we want to use. It is more of an agnostic solution that we want to develop.

Speaking about whether the product has significantly improved our company's data exchange processes, I would say that at this point in time, we are trying to deal with the concerns associated with the front-end part. For me, seamless exposure is what I was looking for in a product, and so my company is still evaluating multiple solutions apart from Mule Anypoint Platform.

The platform's cloud integration capabilities are good.

In the current scenario, most of the products have to be on the cloud for multiple reasons. It is not only Mule Anypoint Platform but also other platforms that seamlessly integrate with the cloud services. My company was also looking at Dell Boomi for cloud integration since my company wants to use an iPaaS solution. Mule Anypoint Platform's cloud integration is fine and does not have any issues.

Rather than as a data transformation tool, it is more about the seamless connectivity that the product of the head office and back office systems provides, as well as the clear exposure of APIs the solution provides. The aforementioned features of the product will translate to fast time to market, so I can see how fast I can seamlessly integrate and expose. It is beneficial to my business agility, where you can seamlessly connect and expose. If I want to roll out new products and services, the benefits from the time spent on the market because of the seamless access will crop up.

Considering the factors associated with product-agnostic solutions, I would recommend the Mule Anypoint Platform to other people, especially if it matches their use cases. When it comes to some use cases, like Salesforce-specific use cases or SAP-specific use cases, we can have a look at different platforms.

I rate the overall tool an eight and a half out of ten.

The solution is a middleware integration tool. It's a deployment part where you deploy your Mule applications and also use Anypoint Studio.

It's like other integration tools like TIBCO. 

Mule Anypoint Platform has a good feature for batch processes where the internal tool handles everything. You don't have to handle it by yourself. If you have a large amount of data that needs to be processed, then batch processing is a very helpful part of Mule.

The product is quick to deploy and pretty straightforward. 

It can scale. 

The pricing is pretty good. 

The stability could be better. That said, they are also getting stabilized as part of increasing the versions and working on that. Previously, Mule version 3 was, of course, very unstable. However, now, version four is pretty stable now.

There have not been very good resources to help us find solutions to issues. 

I've been using the solution for around two or three years.

The stability is getting better and continues to improve, however, previous versions were quite unstable. 

It's a scalable product. If you create an image, a docker image, then you can scale it automatically. There are no issues.

We have onsite people who can help with the technical support. They have access to Mule support. I have sent a couple of queries to them, and they have contacted Mule to resolve any issues. I personally have not contacted Mule support directly.

I'm familiar with TIBCO. TIBCO has a PW container edition, and they're similar. However, PW is using expert language for internal and external transformation. Mule is using the database transformation. That database transformation, it's a totally new language. If you want to use the Mule, then you should have experience in that first.

Mule is a very good competitor of TIBCO, and Salesforce has acquired Mule. So the market has also grown drastically for Mule. 

We may have also moved based on the price, of which Mule's is better.

If they used XPath, XML query language, instead of DataWeave, it would be ideal. That way, our users don't need to worry about knowing a different language.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

If you're deploying your cloud hub, then it takes time to deploy. That said, if you have that setup on your private crowd, then it takes a couple of seconds or a couple of minutes. It's very fast.

While I'm not sure of the exact cost, it is reasonable, and less than TIBCO.

We are a Mule partner. 

When working with customers, we use both cloud and on-premises deployments. 

I'd recommend Mule to others. It is good in web surveys, REST APIs, and is easy to use. Also, they need to be aware that with Mule, they will have to understand the  DataWeave expression language. If you use DataWeave expression language, then the processing time and performance also increase.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I've used the application heavily and taken projects to production. I know it well. 

We mostly use it for reprocessing messages in case of failures within asynchronous flows across millions of applications.

We use it for integrating different applications within our infrastructure.

We have a use case involving licenses and applications deployed on our CloudHub. We needed a solution within the MuleSoft ecosystem, and that's why we chose Anypoint MQ. 

Our main purpose for using Anypoint MQ is reprocessing. We have a three-layer architecture where we send messages between layers to ensure message persistence. Since the flow is completely asynchronous, messages can be lost if there's an issue on the backend. Anypoint MQ helps us with reprocessing to prevent this.

We use simple queues and exchanges to route messages to multiple queues. The publish/subscribe model is also helpful.

When it comes to external systems, we need to use APIs. So, it needs some extra effort.

When we are integrating with other applications, readily available connectors make it easy. However, when it comes to external applications, connectivity isn't as straightforward. 

We need to use RESTful APIs to get and push messages. While it's doable, it's not as simple as using the pre-built connectors.

In future releases, Anypoint MQ can increase the message size limit a little bit. We faced issues while working with SAP integrations. SAP can have very large files, and we couldn't handle those within the Anypoint MQ limit.

I have been using it for three years. 

So far, it's meeting our requirements well. There are around 300+ applications using it.

Currently, we have three administrators.

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

I worked on Kafka before, but in this company, Anypoint MQ is the first one.

The advantage for MuleSoft, I see, is it's integrated within the platform. We are trying to have MuleSoft as our primary integration platform, so that meets the use case of the company.

We don't use Anypoint MQ for all the external systems. It's only for the internal communication within MuleSoft applications. It's easy to integrate with MuleSoft products.

It is easy to set it up. Managing queues or exchanges in Anypoint MQ – the usage, is that straightforward as well.

I would recommend using it. If it's for MuleSoft integrations, then definitely a green signal for Anypoint MQ. In the case of external applications, I haven't actually tried it.

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

Mule Anypoint Platform is used for the integration of different services or customer databases with Microsoft solutions.

The most valuable feature of the solution is a huge list of available connectors for a lot of different platforms, which we can use very easily.

It would be better if we had a clearer view of the solution's future releases. Mule Anypoint Platform is migrating to a new JDK, and the old JDK won't be supported within a year. Currently, we do not have a calendar or scheduler about when all the connectors will support the new JDK 17.

I have been using Mule Anypoint Platform for about one year.

Mule Anypoint Platform is a pretty stable solution.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

For the moment, smaller clients would consider choosing MuleSoft as their integration platform. As a rule, the Mule Anypoint Platform is more suitable for middle or large clients.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for scalability.

MuleSoft provides custom support for every client. You can list your account and have open tickets if you have any problems. We have pretty solid technical support from MuleSoft.

Positive

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

With ready API, the solution can be deployed within a few minutes. If you don't have an API at all, a day will be enough to deploy a very simple but useful API from scratch.

Currently, MuleSoft is moving from the license type to the pay-as-you-go type. The solution's pricing, as per the old approach, is expensive. That is the main reason why we don't have a lot of small-sized customers. With MuleSoft's new approach, we will have new opportunities to integrate small businesses.

The solution's API Designer and API Manager have improved the management of our client's already established APIs. The most valuable features of the solution are Design Center and Runtime Manager. Mule Anypoint Platform provides some basic security approaches, including HTTPS protocol and secure configuration opportunities.

My recommendation to users is to use already described or already propagated best practices that help very much in development. The best advice for developers is to be part of the community. MuleSoft has a great community, including different channels or meetups that could help you a lot in certain cases. When you have some problems, you can address any developers, and they will be ready to talk to you.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We transfer data between systems. We are to save the data to make the communication between systems synchronous. We use Anypoint MQ for making the communication synchronous. The source integration component will place the data into Anypoint MQ, and the target company will take it from there.

Because our customers are moving from on-premise to cloud, it's mostly costs that have been saved and nothing else.

The most valuable feature is the messaging system.

Anypoint MQ is not a pure messaging product. There are so many solutions like this, but this is not as mature as those products. The other MQ products have the capability of reprocessing and maintaining the persistence of the data. They can handle large volumes and large messages, but Anypoint MQ doesn't have those capabilities.

It can only handle a maximum size of 10 megabytes. The other MQ products have a larger capacity. IBM MQ can handle 100 megabytes of data or even solid gigabytes. This doesn't have that capability.

This solution has a lot of gaps. It's not a pure MQ product. We have sort of exposed this product with different protocols like TCP. Also, it has to evaluate these capabilities compared to the other market products.

I have been using this solution for four years. The solution is used on an iPaaS cloud provided by MuleSoft.

The stability of Anypoint is not as mature as other MQ products.

The scalability is under the hood. It is AWS, and it is reliable. It's not user-based. It is automation-based and IT products-based. We have deployed five or six individuals using Anypoint MQ.

This is not a pure provider. It is just a tactical solution cloud. In the long run, we want to go back to square one and use other MQ products like ActiveMQ or IBM MQ because of Anypoint's limitations. For instance, it can't handle more than 10 megabytes of data, and it can't hold more than 50 persistent messages.

Deployment and maintenance are automated. There is an initial automation that is required.

Technical support is good.

We previously used a stable solution. We moved to this product thinking that the cost would be reduced, but things are not working as expected. We plan to go back to using the old solution.

Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk.

You don't need an explicit skill set for deployment. Anyone can do it.

I can't give you a straightforward answer because sometimes it depends on the usage. If you're going to have fewer than 5 million messages, it is free of cost. If you're going to have more than 5 million messages, you will be charged $100 per month.

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10. 

We thought that this was a pure demo product. We moved from IBM to MuleSoft thinking that it would work like IBM, but that's not what happened.

My advice is to try to evaluate the product beforehand and see whether it fits your needs and requirements. Check if it covers all of your use cases. Otherwise, it won't work.

There are a lot of MQ products on the market, but this is suitable for small scale customers and not for large scale.

We haven't switched solutions yet, but the plan is to switch because of this product's limitations. It doesn't cover all the use cases.