We performed a comparison between SAS Data Integration Server and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."The solution offers very good data manipulation and loading."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its amazing capabilities in regard to data handling."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"It frankly fills the gap between IT and business by having approval and policy enforcement on each state and cycle of the asset from the moment it gets created until it is retired."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console."
"High throughput and excellent scalability."
"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.)"
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"So I would like to see improved integration with other software."
"The initial setup of SAS Data Integration Server was complex."
"The transform tool has limited access. They should make it more flexible."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."
"I'd like to see the admin portal for managing the integration server go up a level, to have more capabilities and to be given a more modern web interface."
"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."
"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
SAS Data Integration Server is ranked 34th in Data Integration with 3 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. SAS Data Integration Server is rated 7.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SAS Data Integration Server writes "A stable and scalable tool with data handling capabilities and an amazing technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". SAS Data Integration Server is most compared with Palantir Foundry, SSIS, Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), Azure Data Factory and AWS Glue, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi iPaaS.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.