We performed a comparison between Magic xpi Integration Platform and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MuleSoft, Microsoft, Oracle and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)."The stability of the solution is OK."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed."
"webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators."
"A product with good API and EDI components."
"The solution has a very comprehensive and versatile set of connectors. I've been able to utilize it for multiple, different mechanisms. We do a lot of SaaS and we do have IoT devices and the solution is comprehensive in those areas."
"It is a very stable product."
"It is not performing well."
"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."
"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"Support is expensive."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."
"It is quite expensive."
"The logging capability has room for improvement. That way, we could keep a history of all the transactions. It would be helpful to be able to get to that without having to build a standalone solution to do so."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Magic xpi Integration Platform is ranked 23rd in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Magic xpi Integration Platform is rated 3.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Magic xpi Integration Platform writes "A low-performing integration tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Magic xpi Integration Platform is most compared with Mule ESB, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration.
We monitor all Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) 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.