webMethods.io Reviews

The tool supports gRPC. It is the best product in the market.

The tool has its own proprietary language. It does not use Java or C#. The learning curve is a little steep at first. Once we get familiar with it, we might like to use it. The product must provide AI features to auto-generate logic based on our request.

I have been working with the product for more than 20 years.

The solution is scalable.

The technical support is good.

The product is easy to implement. We help our customers to implement the solution.

People who want to use the product must request a trial. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

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

I have been using webMethods Integration Server for approximately three and a half years.

The stability of the webMethods Integration Server is good.

I rate the scalability of webMethods Integration Server a nine out of ten.

The technical support is very good. We were using the peer services and they were helpful at supporting every aspect of webMethods Integration Server and with ARIS.

Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced.

We would advise others to at least give webMethods Integration Server a try. Based on the solution's usability and ease of use it is very good. You don't have to do a lot of coding, it is close to an out-of-the-box functioning solution. It makes life easier.

I rate webMethods Integration Server a nine out of ten.

CentraSite for governance and life cycle management. It frankly fills the gap between IT and business by having approval and policy enforcement on each state and cycle of the asset from the moment it gets created until it is retired.

It becomes the only integration platform through which any external/internal data exchange does any web services. Below are more details:

• There are many projects in the organization which need data from external entities and all integration endpoints implemented using webMethods integration platform.
• Departments in the organization currently understand what to exchange and in what type by having an enterprise data model in webMethods integration platform.
• Business users are involved in any integration as approvals have to take place throughout the lifecycle of the service.
• Reports and dashboards give management a big picture of the integration usage and potential bottlenecks.

Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial.

Eight years using the following different product versions:

• webMethods API Management platform – CentraSite, Mediator, API Portal, API Gateway
• webMethods Integration Server
• webMethods Universal Messaging
• Terracotta In-Memory
• webMethods Business Process Management
• webMethods Optimize for Process

No.

No.

Good as long the support request is clear and justified.

Yes, Adobe LiveCycle ES4. Adobe LiveCycle is superior when it comes to UI and process development, whereas, the integration capabilities are less compared to webMethods.

Complex. Lots of configuration parameters have to be set to guarantee a solid platform. Some of these parameters are not mentioned in the product documentation!

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

No.

• Requirements for API life cycle model should be gathered carefully.
• Consider SOA governance and don’t impose lots of policies that restrict the visibility of assets/services.
• Always consider an enterprise data model for service integration and business processes.
• Define potential KPIs for process optimization during the process definition phase, not during the implementation.
• Consider In-Memory while clustering the servers and developing services.
• Consider an asynchronous integration pattern to guarantee the delivery.

Used for intra-company application-to-application integration and for intercompany B2B integration (order to cash, procure payment, HR, and banking functions).

WM is an enterprise bus which is used for all integrations, bringing all message transfers into one application, and making monitoring and integration of applications easy.

The main assets are its 

• flow language
• debugging
• Broker. 

Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging.

• Broker
• Trading partners
• Portal

We develop EAI applications using webMethods using broker, TN, and IS. 

We use a Publish/Subscribe mechanism in every interface which we develop, because we have found this approach to be the best for every scenario.

It helps a lot. Most of the work can be more easily done by using webMethods compared to other tools.

Broker and UM are the best.

Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools. 

In our organization, we use many middleware tools. Out of all them, I found webMethods is the most efficient.

The Integration Server and Trading Networks Server. They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform.

It has helped us streamline data from hundreds of non-SAP systems into the SAP system.

Ten-plus years.

Yes, there is still plenty of room for improvement in MWS, SAG Designer.

Not much.

On a scale of one to 10, around seven.

No we didn't use any other suite of EAI products.

I don't have insight on the pricing.

I have no information on that.

Upgrade to recent versions has improved things considerably compared to older versions.

This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support.

How simple it is to create new solutions.

It is an integration platform, so it has improved my organization by giving it one common platform to work with multiple systems.

12 years.

Yes, somewhat.

In terms of scale, I would give it a four out of 10.

Yes. I was sent to a different company, and due to this, I switched solutions that I was working in. The company hasn't switch integration platforms since I have been working in this position (almost 10 years).

I was in the company when they only started with webMethods. It used to be a very simple solution used for a few integrations. Now, it is much more complex. We've got many more frameworks, multiple countries, much more services, etc.

I'm not involved in this.

The company evaluated that. I wasn't included in this. Also, we did another evaluation a few years back when the company was wondering if we shouldn't switch to a different solution. We stayed with webMethods.