We performed a comparison between OpenText MBPM and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"webMethods Integration Server is an easy-to-use solution and does not require a lot of coding."
"We needed a tool that was able to orchestrate and help us configure our APIs so that we could maintain and see the heartbeat, traffic, trends, etc."
"The most valuable feature of webMethods Integration Server is all the capabilities it provides. We leverage most of the features, that they have offered to us. Our vendor has made some additional features on top of the webMethods Integration Server and we use all the features together."
"Currently, we're using this solution for the integration server which helps us to integrate with the mainframe."
"A product with good API and EDI components."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."
"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"The market webMethods Integration Server falls under is a very crowded market, so for the product to stand out, Software AG would need to get traction in the open source community by releasing a new version or a base version and open source it, so people can create new custom components and add it to the portfolio."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". OpenText MBPM is most compared with Camunda, 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 Business Process Management (BPM) 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.