MuleSoft Anypoint Platform Reviews

We use the Mule Anypoint Platform for API management and integration.

I am not an end-user of the platform because I'm an architect, and we simply evaluated and deployed it for the business to use. I am not able to provide platform usage analytics.

The ability to define multi-tiered APIs and reuse them is a fantastic platform feature.

Code quality, Code Security, SaaS, and DaaS security, can all be improved.

We recently onboarded and we went live only in the month of February. We are still new to the platform. 

We have been working with the Mule Anypoint Platform for just three months. 

So far it has been good. We are still evolving for broader usage of the platform.

Mule Anypoint Platform is a stable product.

We haven't gotten to that layer yet, but I believe it is scalable, based on the description that we have.

It's a new platform, a new setup in Azure, and I don't believe that we have yet met the scalability criteria. We are still attempting to consume the platform's threshold, which we have acquired.

Mule Anypoint Platform is not being used by a single department. It is being used by the entire organization.

Technical support is both helpful and supportive.

We used DevOps to deploy. We have set up the pipelines on Azure.

I haven't deployed any directly, but deployments can be done within minutes.

It is easy to set up. We have excellent documentation on the deployment and configuration steps.

I am not aware of the cost. It is completely managed by the vendor management team.

They should be knowledgeable about their industry. They should leverage the platform's use cases and try to deploy it only when it is required.

I am a client of this product.

I would rate Mule Anypoint Platform an eight out of ten.

I would recommend Anypoint MQ to customers using MuleSoft as an integration platform. Anypoint MQ is a pure messaging product. The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good.

The solution's licensing model is expensive and could be improved.

I've recently started using Anypoint MQ.

The solution’s technical support is good, but they should work on their response time.

Neutral

Anypoint MQ is easy to configure. However, it is not that easy when compared to Apache Kafka.

If customers using open-source integration or any springboard integrations need JMS, they must carefully evaluate the product. I would recommend Anypoint MQ only for MuleSoft customers. I won't recommend the solution to customers using a different integration platform because there's a cost associated with the product.

Overall, I rate Anypoint MQ an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for migration and integration.

There are issues with dead-letter queues.

I have been using Anypoint MQ for one year.

The product is stable so far.

The customer service is not good enough in Hong Kong.

We chose Anypoint MQ because it is a top-rated product in the market.

For the basic setup, we use some local message queues and integrate them with the message queue. It took one year to complete the setup.

We used another tool because it was complicated, and we had to hire a third party to build the architecture. The setup is quite complicated.

Anypoint MQ has stability issues. I have experienced data loss and inconsistent behaviour. The data isn't always pushed to the SQL database. When I put a message in the SQL queue, the data should be static, but it's not. Additionally, clicking a message in Anypoint MQ can sometimes trigger database loss. This instability becomes particularly noticeable when starting or restarting the server.

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

I think the solution is used to build APIs

The transforming message is an area in the solution that needs to be improved. There is not much information on the internet, and since MuleSoft is new, there is nothing to research or find in Stack Overflow.

They are probably trying to test two layers at once. I don't know how that would be possible. I've been trying to work between something another company left recently. So while testing it, it's been hard because there are a lot of layers, and some of them are not okay. If I could test two locally, that would be great.

I have been using it for a couple of months. So, it has only been two or three months.

It is a stable product.

Previously, we used Cisco in our company.

The initial setup was simple.

I would recommend others to use it because it's very easy to start. Overall, I rate it an eight and a half to nine out of ten.

It's kind of a hybrid integration. We are trying to connect some of the paths to tie SaaS and on-premise applications together.

It's basically leveraging the CSP's native IM, which is great.

The stability is good.

It's highly scalable. 

The flexibility has been great overall.

We would like an entire DevOps in place in this particular solution. Which would help us in terms of automation.

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

We have found the solution to be quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

I would describe the solution as very scalable. If a company needs to expand the product out, it can do so.

As integrators, we can set up the solution for our clients. 

We didn't look at other options at the time as the customer wanted this particular solution. We didn't do any comparison shopping. 

We are a partner and a systems integrator.

I would advise potential new users to look at the service and target destination, where there is an expectation of automation.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten based on its overall scalability and flexibility. We're quite happy with it so far.

I used it in my previous company. We were using it to build a middleware layer to connect a lot of systems together. Oracle and Salesforce were the two primary systems that were being done. We were building it out so that we could hook in any of the ERP systems that we had at that company. So, the use case was to be able to connect systems and do process integration across multiple ERP systems.

Overall, it is a pretty good product. It is also very scalable.

Its documentation needed a little bit of work to make it more usable. It is a platform that is used mainly by developers and other people for connecting systems. Its documentation was confusing in some areas and was not very helpful in other areas. I had to go to a consultant to get some work done, which ideally shouldn't be required.

It is very scalable. It can be used from a small project to a large project.

I would rate Mule Anypoint Platform an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to connect multiple enterprise applications across multiple clouds.

The API toolkit is the solution's most valuable aspect at this time, for our organization.

I don't know if there are any real pain points per se. 

The terms of use and how it's priced has become very difficult to manage, which is forcing us to look for alternatives already - and we haven't even been using it for that long just yet.

The initial setup is rather complex.

There should be more templates associated with a standard to large ERP. There are 18 interfaces required between HighJump to SAP, our warehouse management system. Those templates are standard. Everybody that has HighJump and that has SAP would have to do those 18 interfaces and they should be in a template - yet those templates don't exist. Due to that, there's too much API building from scratch. They should be able to build an API library.

We've been using this solution for the last five months. It hasn't been very long just yet.

We haven't used the solution for too long. That said, it seems stable. It is early to make that determination as we've only been using it for about five months. However, there haven't been any bugs or glitches and it doesn't seem to crash or freeze at all.

Since we haven't yet used the solution for a long time, we haven't tried to scale it. We don't see any scaling limits at this point, however, there could be. We'll see when we expand it across our three SAP instances.

How many people actually use the product is hard to gauge. An API is being used with people not even knowing it. In essence, the entire organization is using APIs that tie our applications together. I'd say working with it, touching it, there are probably six employees on it.

Technical support has been okay. There's room for a bit of improvement. They could be more standardized. The level of service seems to depend on who you get.

The initial setup is not simple or straightforward. It's actually pretty complex to implement. 

The deployment itself took about two months.

We used an integrator that helped us with the initial part of the setup.

We can't discuss pricing at this time as we are under an NDA.

We evaluated lots of options. Now, due to the economics of the solution, we are back to evaluating solutions again. We are looking to see if we can switch to something else.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we are using right now.

I'd recommend this solution to others. However, I'd advise that they be careful of the licensing terms. They're so convoluted. There are many hidden costs in the use of the product and you may not realize what it will actually cost until it's too late.

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

I've been developing Mule applications and have been using Anypoint Studio for development purposes. I have a Mule Anypoint Studio for the certification to test knowledge of the Anypoint Platform in the cloud. I've never been in a live situation for deployment within the cloud.

We use Mule for daily activities like for domains like retail, eCommerce and the wholesale department. So most of the daily basic integration, ETL jobs when we have eCommerce, they do it in the USA. There are different time zones. In the Belgian system, you begin getting the insights using or doing analysis on the data. It enables us to have real-time integrations. Data flows from different domains as well as ETL jobs and for real-time integration.

There were too many stores to make and to work on one platform, so this was the main purpose of use. There were different texts coming in and other things in the stores. They had to scan them and when they passed this information to other domains, like eCommerce, for example. All these jobs were running at a specific time. 

Rapid API development using RAML, with contract first approach. It is easy to visualize real time mocking service and making it available in portal for end users, during requirements phase.

In terms of improvement, customer support is a bit slow. I emailed the sales team for a pricing comparison, still no response. The developer community is far more generous on the other hand. Pricing model is very expensive, Mule should consider Pay as You go model. It will help on-boarding new clients in Asia region. 

Mule should have better B2B integration. Mule supports the idea of API Led Architecture and system of records approach. When it comes to broad perspectives such as B2B, competitive tools have better EIPs. 

I have been using Mule Anypoint for a year and a half. 

I was recently researching the cost of scalability purposes in the cloud. For vertical scaling, it's good but the horizontal scaling along with the enterprise is not very good. Horizontal scaling is good in the on-prem system. But I think this is a limitation in all the cloud services providers. That's why the hybrid version is the buzzword nowadays, but for horizontal scalability, the on-prem servers are more flexible and in your control.

Instead of reaching out to customer support, I generally reach out to the Mule community. My peers will answer my questions.

I used an open source tool. Red Hat Fuse. Switching from different tools and technologies depends on the project in hand.

From a developer perspective initial setup is quite easy. From an executive  perspective, it is difficult.

The pricing is a bit high for clients. As a developer, and my superiors and architects agree, that this is the easiest tool to use. I've worked with two configuration technologies, one was open-source and there is a huge difference with this. This is the easiest and best tool available. Mule should consider lowering the price.

The should make improvements for B2B enterprises

I would rate it an eight out of ten as it's a very good product.