CentraSite vs webMethods.io comparison

"The governance is powerful, and you can look up services very easily, which may reduce some development cycle time."

"It integrates well with various servers."

"All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."

"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."

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

"The most valuable feature of webMethods Integration Server is all the capabilities it provides. We leverage most of the features, that they have offered to us. Our vendor has made some additional features on top of the webMethods Integration Server and we use all the features together."

"webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators."

"​Broker and UM are the best features."

"The orchestration aspects of APIs, the integration capabilities, and the logging functionalities were the most critical features of our workflow."

"The setup is mild. It's not so simple and not very difficult. You can make it happen with some configuration, but it's not easy for non-professional people."

"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."

"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."

"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."

"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."

"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."

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

"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."

"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."

"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."

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

"This is an expensive product and we may replace it with something more reasonably priced."

"It is worth the cost."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."

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

"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."