IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs TIBCO BusinessWorks comparison

"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."

"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."

"It is a stable solution."

"Redirection is a key feature. It helps in managing multiple microservices by centralizing control and access."

"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."

"The most valuable features are the stability and the time to market."

"It is a very robust system."

"It is very stable. It is a market leader, and it has connectors to many of the legacy systems. It also has enterprise cloud connectors."

"The most important thing is that it is easy for developers to work with."

"Good TIBCO BusinessWorks features are the admin console and the ability to roll back to the previous version."

"The most valuable part of the solution is the ease-of-use and ease of deployment."

"The initial setup of TIBCO BusinessWorks was straightforward since we have used the solution in our organization for a long time."

"I work in operations, so I value BusinessWorks' performance the most."

"Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent."

"The initial setup is not easy."

"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."

"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."

"The pricing can be improved."

"This solution's cloud could be improved. I don't know whether it was because we didn't have the internal expertise or if it was the product itself, but since they came later—I think only two or three years into the cloud—after many other iPaaS that had been in the cloud for longer, I feel that maybe they haven't matured in terms of the cloud."

"The communication protocols could be improved."

"The cost has room for improvement."

"Improve Business Studio's stability to further minimize development time."

"They don't support out of the box - you have to buy adapters or you have to have the technology."

"Challenges with TIBCO BusinessWorks were mainly due to unclear documentation, but these were overcome by referring to comprehensive documents and raising tickets with TIBCO support."

"There are multiple plugins which increase the number of product installations."

"There are not many plugins available to integrate the databases. We have to write it in Java and integrate it. The developers should have more knowledge. These are the three main aspects that they could improve."

"The solution's pricing model is very flexible."

"It is an expensive solution."

"The payments made for service are the only addition to the standard licensing fees that we pay for the solution."

"The product is not cheap."

"I don't have the prices of the products, but I know that TIBCO is not a cheap solution. I think that this solution is more suitable for large companies because I don't think that small- or medium-sized companies would have the money for this solution. WSO2 has the community version for free, so many of the smaller companies can use it. I'm not sure what the prices are for support, though, so I suppose the support for WSO2 is not cheap either."

"TIBCO BusinessWorks is expensive."

"Licensing scheme is too rigid"

"I give the cost of the solution a four out of ten."

"TIBCO BusinessWorks is a very expensive solution."

"The license is expensive, and I would rate it one out of ten."