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."

"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."

"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."

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

"The solution has a very comprehensive and versatile set of connectors. I've been able to utilize it for multiple, different mechanisms. We do a lot of SaaS and we do have IoT devices and the solution is comprehensive in those areas."

"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."

"There's hardware, software and application integration, providing hosting flexibility."

"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."

"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."

"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."

"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."

"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."

"We need more dashboards and reporting engines that can provide detailed information for management. In short, we need better analytics."

"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."

"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."

"webMethods.io Integration's installation is complex. It should also improve integration and connectors."

"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 price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

"The product is very expensive."

"I do think webMethods is coming under increasing pressure when it comes to their price-to-feature value proposition. It's probably the single biggest strategic risk they have. They're very expensive in their industry. They've been raising the price recently, especially when compared with their competitors."

"I would like to see better pricing for the license."

"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."

"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."

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

"The solution’s pricing is too high."