IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs SnapLogic comparison

"IBM Watson Catalog and data pipelines are the most valuable features of the solution."

"I love the way that I can start at a very basic level with my data management journey by capturing my policies, justifying my data, and putting them into different categories to say this is data relating to individuals, for example, or data relating to geography."

"The most valuable feature of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is the Modeler flows. The ability to develop models using a graphical approach and the capability to connect to various sources, as well as the data virtualization capabilities, allow me to easily access and utilize data that is dispersed across different sources."

"The most valuable features of IBM Cloud Pak for Data are the Watson Studio, where we can initiate more groups and write code. Additionally, Watson Machine Learning is available with many other services, such as APIs which you can plug the machine learning models."

"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."

"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten."

"Cloud Pak's most valuable features are IBM MQ, IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, and ISPF."

"One of Cloud Pak's best features is the Watson Knowledge Catalog, which helps you implement data governance."

"SnapLogice is a low-code development tool."

"It is a stable solution."

"The initial setup is very straightforward."

"SnapLogic is an IPA tool that leverages a low code environment to connect to multiple sources, extract data, and store it in Azure data lake."

"Despite having no prior experience in SnapLogic, we managed to build, test, and prepare it for release in just three hours, handling heavy data efficiently."

"SnapLogic is more user-friendly than Boomi in terms of debugging. You can move the mouse to a place, and it will record and show the data easily."

"The connection with SOAP is the best feature."

"The feature I found most valuable in SnapLogic is low-code development. Low-code development has been very useful for simple processes, which is required for business users such as extracting details from a file or getting things reported by calling your web service. Calling your web service also becomes easier with SnapLogic because of the snaps available, so if you have the documentation, you can call an API. You don't have to write all those clients to call an API, so that is another feature I found very easy in SnapLogic. Configuring and managing all the file systems also become very handy with the solution."

"What I would love to see is an end-to-end, almost a training demo database of some sort, where one of the biggest problems with data management is demonstrated."

"The technical support could be a little better."

"The solution could have more connectors."

"The setup cost is very expensive. The cost depends on the pieces of the solution I'm using, how much data I have, and whether it's on the cloud or on-prem."

"The solution's catalog searching or map search needs to be improved."

"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."

"One thing that bugs me is how much infrastructure Cloud Pak requires for the initial deployment. It doesn't allow you to start small. The smallest permitted deployment is too big. It's a huge problem that prevents us from implementing the solution in many scenarios."

"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."

"I am looking for more scheduling options. When it comes to scheduling, there are different tools in the market."

"If the AI capabilities and integrations were more intuitive and easy for new users to learn, it would be greatly beneficial."

"While new features are always welcome, I do not have anything else at the top of my mind currently."

"What could be improved in SnapLogic is that it was not capable in terms of processing a large number of datasets, but at that point, SnapLogic was evolving. It didn't give a lot of Snaps. I heard recently there are a lot of Snaps getting added and the solution was being enhanced, particularly to connect different data sources. When I was working with SnapLogic six months to one year back, I faced the issue of it not being capable of handling a huge volume of datasets or didn't have much of Snaps, and that was the drawback. If there is any large number of data sets, that's based on or depends on your configuration. If it is a huge volume of data, other traditional ETL tools such as Informatica and Talend can process millions and billions of records, while in SnapLogic, the Snaplex fails or it returns an error in terms of processing that huge volume of data. Informatica, Talend, or any other ETL tool can run for hours in terms of jobs, while SnapLogic jobs fail when the threshold is reached. SnapLogic isn't able to withstand processing, but I don't know if that's still an issue at present, because the solution is getting enhanced and it's been more than six months to one year since I last worked with SnapLogic. There are now a lot of Snaps getting added to the solution, and if it can overcome the limitations I mentioned, SnapLogic could be the go-to tool because currently, it's not being used as much in organizations. It's being used comparatively less compared to other retail tools."

"The setup cost would be four or five. There would be only one point of improvement if the price could be lower."

"SnapLogic sits somewhere in the middle. It doesn’t offer enough easy canned integrations for its users like some of the easier to use integration apps."

"SnapLogic doesn't provide any on-premises software, so users have only cloud-based software to use."

"We'd like zero downtime in the future."

"The solution's pricing is competitive with that of other vendors."

"Cloud Pak's cost is a little high."

"It's quite expensive."

"I think that this product is too expensive for smaller companies."

"IBM Cloud Pak for Data is expensive. If we include the training time and the machine learning, it's expensive. The cost of the execution is more reasonable."

"For the licensing of the solution, there is a yearly payment that needs to be made. Also, since it is expensive, cost-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten."

"The solution is expensive."

"I don't have the exact licensing cost for IBM Cloud Pak for Data, as my company is still finalizing requirements, including monthly, yearly, and three-year licensing fees. Still, on a scale of one to five, I'd rate it a three because, compared to other vendors, it's more complicated."

"The cost with SnapLogic is an annual license and better than Informatica."

"It is a higher initial cost than other easy-to-use integration apps."

"When comparing it with solutions like Apigee or MuleSoft, it still offers better value."

"From the ROI perspective, the price is extremely high"

"SnapLogic is not expensive. It's reasonably priced."

"They have pricing/usage tiers that are easy to move up or down."

"I used the free trial."

"The license model is based on consumption."