We performed a comparison between TIBCO BusinessWorks and Tungsten RPA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most important thing is that it is easy for developers to work with."
"The most valuable feature is the low-code platform."
"It is very stable. It is a market leader, and it has connectors to many of the legacy systems. It also has enterprise cloud connectors."
"The most valuable features are the stability and the time to market."
"BusinessWorks reduces development time, helping developers to focus on business logic."
"The most valuable feature is the integration."
"One of the most valuable features is data transformation. We have some legacy systems which are in old technology, like SOAP, whereas the new ones are in REST. So we use BusinessWorks to transform data from one format to another, from SOAP to REST."
"Customer support is very efficient."
"The drag and drop functionality is quite good."
"Kofax handles UIs via the browser well. If it's not possible, they have other features like modeling screen scrapes, etc."
"The most valuable feature of Kofax RPA is the simplicity of automating tasks."
"The best part of Kofax is that they have a whole concept. It's one product, but also has extra elements that can be integrated."
"Kofax RPA's best feature is its high success percentage in picking up information from documents, especially where the DPI is really low."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems."
"This is a stable platform and we did not encounter any big problems."
"A possible improvement could be to give the capability to use different profiles for each AppNode when an application is deployed on an AppSpace."
"Its price can be improved. For medium enterprises, it is a very expensive tool. In the market, you won't get many resources for this solution. You won't find many developers in the market very easily. The latest version of TIBCO (6.4 or 6.x) is not very stable. It has got many issues. We have raised this with TIBCO, and they are taking a lot of time to come up with a fix, which is making us move away from this product. Some of the performance-tuning aspects are also missing in version 6. They should provide performance-related fixes, which will be helpful for the customers. If you are migrating from the current version to the container-supported version, it is quite expensive. The product has evolved, but it is very pricey. That's one of the challenges. They have provided all the features that are there in other products, but this is a platform upgrade. The platform has completely been changed from 5.x to 6.x, and we can't use the same environment. We can't run both versions on the same server as VM. The development environment is entirely different. In version 5.x, there was a proprietary designer. Now, it has common plug-ins developed on top of Eclipse."
"This solution's cloud could be improved. I don't know whether it was because we didn't have the internal expertise or if it was the product itself, but since they came later—I think only two or three years into the cloud—after many other iPaaS that had been in the cloud for longer, I feel that maybe they haven't matured in terms of the cloud."
"Scaling with the solution is costly because if we need to scale up, we have to buy more memory. That means more money. Solutions like Camel or Pulsar come with built-in options to scale horizontally, vertically, region-wide or country-wide."
"I'd like to see a new cloud approach in the next release. They need to work on integrations, stability and management issues on their cloud platform."
"Technical support is average. It's not the best."
"The cost of this product is too expensive for smaller companies or those with a small number of integrations."
"Cloud fitness is lacking"
"The product should improve desktop automation, which is hard to configure. It needs to have custom connectors. It is the only advantage that Microsoft Power Platform has over Kofax RPA. It has more than 800 custom connectors."
"The solution needs to be scalable."
"I would like to see them further enhance the OCR, specifically in the multi-language support."
"The interface could be better from a usability standpoint."
"RPA technology is constantly changing, and sometimes Kofax lags behind."
"The product needs more AI capabilities."
"There is really nothing special about the capabilities of this product."
"This product has room for improvement in support of aviation. The interface could be improved in the next release."
TIBCO BusinessWorks is ranked 18th in Data Integration with 23 reviews while Tungsten RPA is ranked 12th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 24 reviews. TIBCO BusinessWorks is rated 8.0, while Tungsten RPA is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of TIBCO BusinessWorks writes "Reliable integration solution with robust communication capabilities and good scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tungsten RPA writes "A stable product that provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems". TIBCO BusinessWorks is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, Mule Anypoint Platform, Spring Cloud Data Flow, Talend Open Studio and Confluent, whereas Tungsten RPA is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA) and SAS Data Management. See our TIBCO BusinessWorks vs. Tungsten RPA report.
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.