We performed a comparison between FME and IBM InfoSphere Information Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has a very friendly user interface. You don't need to use a lot of code. For us that's the most important aspect about it. Also, it has a lot of connectors and few forms. It has a strong facial aspect. It can do a lot of facial analysis."
"It has standard plug-ins available for different data sources."
"We make minor subtle changes to the workbenches to improve it. We can share the workbenches. We don't have to use GitHub or anything else."
"The most valuable feature of FME is the graphical user interface. There is nothing better. It is very easy to debug because you can see all steps where there are failures. Overall the software is easy to optimize a process."
"All spatial features are unrivaled, and the possibility to execute them based on a scheduled trigger, manual, e-mail, Websocket, tweet, file/directory change or virtually any trigger is most valuable."
"IBM InfoSphere Information Server is stable."
"The integration with different technologies is the most valuable feature."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"This solution is extremely flexible and scalable."
"FME can improve the geographical transformation. I've had some problems with the geographical transformations, but it's probably mostly because I'm not the most skilled geographer in-house. The solution requires some in-depth knowledge to perform some functions."
"To get a higher rating, it would have to improve the price and the associated scalability. These are the main issues."
"Improvements could be made to mapping presentations."
"The one thing that always appears in the community is the ability to make really easy loops to loop through data efficiently. That needs to be added at some point."
"FME's price needs improvement for the African market."
"Their technical support needs improvement."
"There are certain shortcomings in the cloud side of the solution, where improvements are required."
"IBM InfoSphere Information Server should be more scalable. It should have the option to change the configuration to run on a single, non-multiple node, or multi-threading processing."
"This solution would benefit from the engine being made more lightweight."
More IBM InfoSphere Information Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
FME is ranked 24th in Data Integration with 5 reviews while IBM InfoSphere Information Server is ranked 36th in Data Integration with 7 reviews. FME is rated 8.6, while IBM InfoSphere Information Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of FME writes "Great for handling large volumes of data, but it is priced a bit high". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM InfoSphere Information Server writes "Prompt support, reliable, but lacking scalability". FME is most compared with Azure Data Factory, Alteryx Designer, Talend Open Studio, SSIS and Informatica PowerCenter, whereas IBM InfoSphere Information Server is most compared with IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Qlik Replicate, IBM Watson Knowledge Catalog, IBM Cloud Pak for Data and Oracle GoldenGate. See our FME vs. IBM InfoSphere Information Server report.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.
