We performed a comparison between Fiorano ESB and Mule ESB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.Find out what your peers are saying about Software AG, MuleSoft, IBM and others in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) .
"One of the most valuable features is the scalability. Whenever it's required, we can add more servers and scale. We can actually use specific servers for specific stuff. Unlike in other solutions, now we can implement one server purely dedicated to core-banking-related API. This is very important when it comes to the PCI DSS certification."
"It is easily deployable and manageable. It has microservices-based architecture, which means that you can deploy the solution based on your needs, and you can manage the solution very easily."
"Easy connectivity and easy integration."
"Mule ESB is a very easy-to-use and user-friendly solution."
"The cloud and integration abilities are most useful allowing us to use applications such as Salesforce and DataWeave."
"I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support."
"The most valuable feature is that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs."
"This tool has exceptional API management and integration connectors in addition to multiple out of the box connectors."
"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."
"Fiorano ESB could be improved by becoming more user-friendly. Most of the pages and generated reports on API usage are already there, but they could be more user-friendly. There could be more selections added to generate reports. Overall, though, Fiorano suits all our needs and has good functionality."
"The current version will not be supported for much longer."
"It should have some amount of logging."
"In an upcoming release, I would like to see more additional concept for exception handling, batch processing, and increased integration with other application."
"MuleSoft isn't as mature as some other integration technologies out there like IBM WebSphere. There's room for growth, and MuleSoft is working toward that."
"Mule ESB could be more user-friendly. I think users must learn about the architecture before they start coding. The price could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an EDIFACT integration."
"We would like the ability to use our own code. This would allow us to develop customizations with ease. Additionally, it would be nice to have more analytics or insights on the exchanged information between databases."
"In order to meet the new trend of active metadata management, we need intelligent APIs that can retrieve new data designs and trigger actions over new findings without human intervention."
"There are some features on the commercial version of the solution that would be great if they were on the community version. Additionally, if they added more authorization features it would be helpful."
Fiorano ESB is ranked 9th in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 1 review while Mule ESB is ranked 2nd in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 16 reviews. Fiorano ESB is rated 9.0, while Mule ESB is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fiorano ESB writes "Scalable and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Scaled easily, had good ROI and time to value, and didn't require taking care of the infrastructure". Fiorano ESB is most compared with Oracle Service Bus, whereas Mule ESB is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Oracle Service Bus, Red Hat Fuse and Mule Anypoint Platform.
See our list of best ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) vendors.
We monitor all ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.