We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Pak for Integration and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."
"It has enabled digital business processes. It's the connection between our ERP system and the rest of the company. We were able to automate processing invoices digitally like an inbound invoice and FastPay payments."
"If SEEBURGER plans to do something, they will meet their target. We haven't been disappointed by them at all. For example, we had six trading partners to onboard and they said, "We'll make it happen," and they did make it happen. They did exactly what they said they would do. That's a really positive thing."
"The solution is flexible when it comes to adding integrations. It is much easier to use than the other tools we have to move the files. Across the board, we can move files in a short amount of time compared to our other existing tools."
"The stability is world-class. It is as good as any of the other options out there. They have addressed hiccups quickly, professionally, and with an excellent response."
"In our landscape, we have a lot of AS/400s or iSeries and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) has a file service listener that allows data to seamlessly be transferred between the SEEBURGER solution and the AS/400."
"It is stable and reliable. We have not had any issues."
"We can use it to script and monitor processes."
"We rarely get hanged processes."
"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"The pricing can be improved."
"Their traditional model is a vendor flow. We are looking to do a customer-based flow, which which require significant development from SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). We are working with them to do this using their WebEDI. It is a brand new area for them, but it could be an option in the future."
"The initial setup is not the straightforward. It took couple of months for us to set up."
"Java is very old technology and they should move away from it, to anything that's better."
"I would like there to be a feature that could handle the limited server."
"I would've liked, from day one, to learn how to do my own mapping. That would have saved a lot of time and effort if that had been brought forward earlier. It's there, I just didn't know about it. Also, some tidier, easier-to-use interfaces would help."
"They made improvements to the email error alerts that go out, for the EDI technical. Those typically go straight out to the partners. Those messages are significantly clearer and easy to read. The same messages in the front end are not nearly as clear. It's supposed to be the same error, but the message that goes out for EDI is really easy for anybody to read and understand, but you have to be really solution-savvy to understand the message in the system itself."
"The integration is not so excellent. While I'm not saying there is a problem, there is no pattern. When we start a new project, we have to work with new people and processes every time. The technical side of their system is very good, but their change process is not repeatable. It needs to be rebuilt each time."
"On the server side, there are a lot of administration and configuration files that you need to go in and do maintenance on. You have to find them in a certain folder so it's very error-prone and it can be a little time consuming unless it's documented. They could pull some of those individual configuration files into the product itself where there's a better user interface for that."
More IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is ranked 21st in API Management with 4 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 19th in API Management with 37 reviews. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is rated 8.6, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration writes "A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is most compared with IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, IBM DataPower Gateway, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Microsoft Azure API Management, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and Microsoft Azure API Management. See our IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
