OpenText MBPM vs webMethods.io comparison

"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."

"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."

"EDI is robust and integration with SAP is good."

"Operationally, I consider the solution to be quite good."

"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"

"It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a good solution for interacting with outside of the organization. We can integrate the solutions with multiple outside the organization."

"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."

"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."

"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."

"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."

"The deployment should be simplified."

"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."

"webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience."

"It is quite expensive."

"Perhaps in the area of Microservices, where I think Trading Networks could benefit from some improvements."

"The licensing cost is high compared to other options."

"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."

"Technical support is an area where they can improve."

"There is an annual license to use OpenText MBPM."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cost-efficient, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing somewhere between nine and ten since it is a costly solution."

"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."

"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."

"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."

"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."

"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."

"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."

"This is an expensive product and we may replace it with something more reasonably priced."