We performed a comparison between SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite and TIBCO Managed File Transfer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ease of integration of the SEEBURGER product into SAP was pretty seamless. There wasn't any trouble, there weren't any complexities."
"Mapping Designer provides excellent flexibility."
"Another aspect that we employed in the last year-and-a-half has been their CMA platform component, which hooks to the SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) front end. We've been able to set up an automatic testing process for our partners."
"The solution's capabilities in fulfilling our existing B2B integration requirements are brilliant. Among our multiple customers we connect to SAP systems, JDE, all the various ERPs that you can possibly get, Oracle procurement systems, etc. We haven't come across anything yet — and customers are trying to trip us up — that we can't do."
"It has a lot of basic EDI already established for all the main users. Also, it lets me share setups that I had already set up for my first plant. I was able to use them for my second one which was very helpful. I didn't have to start from scratch for my second facility."
"We rarely get hanged processes."
"We can code in Java, which is really good feature. There is very vast command available, which can be used in mapping."
"SEEBURGER BIS can reconcile documentation, like our accounts payable and statements within the system. If you are manually doing it, then it is really time consuming with a lot of errors. Whereas, SEEBURGER BIS allows for a lot of basic level programming within the documentation, filtering, and sorting out VLOOKUP. It lets us get two database tables from two different systems, then merge them based on the logic that we provide. So, it is a very helpful product."
"They have great multi-factor authentication for extra security."
"TIBCO has its own integration tool."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to do centralized administration."
"On the server side, there are a lot of administration and configuration files that you need to go in and do maintenance on. You have to find them in a certain folder so it's very error-prone and it can be a little time consuming unless it's documented. They could pull some of those individual configuration files into the product itself where there's a better user interface for that."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"They have their own private cloud. That's the reason we did not go ahead with managing everything by ourselves or moving into the cloud. They said that they're going to be doing it within the next two years, having access to Azure and AWS. That would be something we would like to see."
"In the BIS, if I want to have some API functionalities, that is a separate tool. The integration between the API tool and the BIS is not that straightforward. If they were to combine these tools and give us one suite, that would be helpful. Today I have a lot of partners onboard. I have something like 50,000 partners doing API transactions. If I want to introduce a new tool for API management, I have to do a lot of workarounds. But if it were integrated well within the existing suite, it could be straightforward for me."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
"A person whom I work with, and is not very technical, found the setup complex, as there are a lot of steps."
"I don't think the scalability of the solution is that great because they have tied the solution to their named nodes and it does not allow scalability like some of the cloud products allow."
"There might be some improvements they could make to the portal, but they're not anything that stops me from working."
"Their cloud product is not yet stable."
"The UI could be better."
"I think some of the automated deployment features could use some assistance, which is an area where it currently lacks. The product needs some ability to help it with the deployment model, which is a little difficult."
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 14th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 37 reviews while TIBCO Managed File Transfer is ranked 15th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 3 reviews. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4, while TIBCO Managed File Transfer is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO Managed File Transfer writes "Serves as a straightforward SFTP server that offers reasonably good support". SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and Microsoft Azure API Management, whereas TIBCO Managed File Transfer is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer, CA XCOM Data Transport and MOVEit. See our SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer report.
See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.
