CentraSite vs webMethods.io comparison

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

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

"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."

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

"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."

"WebMethods.io is a powerful tool, but it requires skilled people who can fully utilize its potential."

"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."

"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."

"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."

"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."

"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."

"Technical support is an area where they can improve."

"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."

"The price has room for improvement."

"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."

"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."

"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."

"When it comes to scaling, it requires more RAM and more machines."

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

"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."

"Its cost depends on the use cases."

"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."

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

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

"The product is expensive."

"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."