BMC Data Management for IMS and DB2 on zOS vs webMethods.io comparison

"BMC Data Management improved our data recovery process by simplifying it."

"I have worked with DB2's great features in the last five years. The IDAA feature transformed the vision of warehousing, business analytics, and big data at my bank. Besides the mainframe, I saw that this solution was evolutionary. It gives real-time information."

"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."

"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."

"The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation."

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

"The performance is good."

"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."

"What I like best about webMethods Integration Server is its portfolio of connectors."

"Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed."

"One area for improvement with this product could be in providing clearer guidance and tools for disaster recovery planning and execution."

"DB2 is a hard tool to grasp. It's hard for users to learn how to use it. It's not easy to see how it works."

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

"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."

"It is quite expensive."

"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"

"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."

"The solution's release management feature could be better."

"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."

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

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"The solution’s pricing is too high."

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

"It is worth the cost."

"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."

"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."

"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."

"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."