Spring Cloud Data Flow vs webMethods.io comparison

"The solution's most valuable feature is that it allows us to use different batch data sources, retrieve the data, and then do the data processing, after which we can convert and store it in the target."

"The most valuable features of Spring Cloud Data Flow are the simple programming model, integration, dependency Injection, and ability to do any injection. Additionally, auto-configuration is another important feature because we don't have to configure the database and or set up the boilerplate in the database in every project. The composability is good, we can create small workloads and compose them in any way we like."

"The best thing I like about Spring Cloud Data Flow is its plug-and-play model."

"The most valuable feature is real-time streaming."

"The product is very user-friendly."

"The dashboards in Spring Cloud Dataflow are quite valuable."

"There are a lot of options in Spring Cloud. It's flexible in terms of how we can use it. It's a full infrastructure."

"The ease of deployment on Kubernetes, the seamless integration for orchestration of various pipelines, and the visual dashboard that simplifies operations even for non-specialists such as quality analysts."

"The product is very stable."

"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."

"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 synchronous and asynchronous messaging system the solution provides is very good."

"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."

"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."

"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."

"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."

"I would improve the dashboard features as they are not very user-friendly."

"There were instances of deployment pipelines getting stuck, and the dashboard not always accurately showing the application status, requiring manual intervention such as rerunning applications or refreshing the dashboard."

"The configurations could be better. Some configurations are a little bit time-consuming in terms of trying to understand using the Spring Cloud documentation."

"Spring Cloud Data Flow is not an easy-to-use tool, so improvements are required."

"The solution's community support could be improved."

"Spring Cloud Data Flow could improve the user interface. We can drag and drop in the application for the configuration and settings, and deploy it right from the UI, without having to run a CI/CD pipeline. However, that does not work with Kubernetes, it only works when we are working with jars as the Spring Cloud Data Flow applications."

"Some of the features, like the monitoring tools, are not very mature and are still evolving."

"On the tool's online discussion forums, you may get stuck with an issue, making it an area where improvements are required."

"A while ago, they were hacked, and it took them a very long time to open their website again in order to download any service packs or any features. I don't know what they could do differently. I know that they were vulnerable, and there was some downtime, but because they were down, we were unable to download any potential service packs."

"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."

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

"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."

"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."

"One area that needs improvement is the version upgrade process. Many customers I've worked with encounter challenges when transitioning from their current version, such as x or 9, to a newer version. The process is not smooth, and they must shift their entire website."

"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."

"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."

"The solution provides value for money, and we are currently using its community edition."

"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."

"If you want support from Spring Cloud Data Flow there is a fee. The Spring Framework is open-source and this is a free solution."

"It is a cost-effective solution."

"The product is expensive."

"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."

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

"The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."

"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."

"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."

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