Dataloader.io vs webMethods.io comparison

"I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM."

"DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free."

"he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access."

"With webMethods, the creation of servers and the utilization of Trading Networks facilitate B2B integration. It resolves any related issues effectively."

"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."

"It is a very stable product."

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

"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."

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

"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."

"A product with good API and EDI components."

"We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records."

"DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions."

"Dataloader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than Dataloader."

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

"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."

"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."

"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."

"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."

"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."

"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."

"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."

"The product is inexpensive and economical."

"The solution’s pricing is too high."

"Its cost depends on the use cases."

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

"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."

"It is a cost-effective solution."

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

"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."

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