SAS Access vs webMethods.io comparison

"The most valuable part of SAS/ACCESS is what it is made for: connecting to remote systems that are not part of your physical SAS environment."

"The SAS/ACCESS ability to connect creates an elegant simplicity."

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ease of access to the data in those databases."

"The most valuable feature is you have native access to the external databases."

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ease of access to the data in those databases."

"The most valuable feature is you have native access to the external databases."

"Integration Server does our business-to-business integrations, and its adapters and connectors provide the fastest way to build an integration because we can immediately connect to backend systems without creating a lot of our own custom code, while the vendor’s full support for these adapters brings long-term stability to our services."

"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."

"High throughput and excellent scalability."

"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."

"Time effective by cutting down development time and resource efficient to developer burden, enhance agility and integration between end-to-end applications, platform"

"​Broker and UM are the best features."

"The single biggest differences between webMethods and the other solutions are the range of the offering, the connectors, the stability of the system, the fact that it is an enterprise-grade system, and that you can basically do anything you need with it."

"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."

"I can't really recall any missing feature or general improvement that is needed. We don't really add too many new kinds of databases and therefore our needs are already met."

"The solution's pricing and licensing are expensive."

"The solution can provide access to the newer databases that come out sooner."

"The pricing model needs to be reconsidered and adjusted."

"The primary way that this product can be improved is by adjusting their pricing model."

"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."

"The technical support team pays attention to our issues but at the same time, they don't seem to have an in-depth technical background."

"I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance."

"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."

"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."

"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."

"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see the logs of the services."

"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."

"The pricing model is complex and is based on modular packages as well as the size of the applicable environment."

"The solution's pricing and licensing are expensive."

"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."

"Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"It is worth the cost."

"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."

"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."

"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."

"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."