We performed a comparison between Tungsten RPA and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"The ability to script information from websites is most valuable. It also seems to be fairly robust and reasonably easy to manage on a server-based deployment. We have a number of robots operating on the central server."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable features are workflow and process automation."
"The flexibility to use already-developed components is really good. You can use it for Excel-related operations and other things."
"It is very simple and easy to learn compared to any other RPA tools such as UiPath, Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism."
"The features that we have found the most valuable are the integration of different third-party support and productivity services."
"The product provided all the security controls that we asked them."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."
"Currently, we're using this solution for the integration server which helps us to integrate with the mainframe."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"The solution has a very comprehensive and versatile set of connectors. I've been able to utilize it for multiple, different mechanisms. We do a lot of SaaS and we do have IoT devices and the solution is comprehensive in those areas."
"It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine)."
"What I like best about webMethods Integration Server is its portfolio of connectors."
"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."
"There is really nothing special about the capabilities of this product."
"The process discovery could be a bit better."
"The solution could use some AI integrated features."
"The technical support must be improved."
"We are on version 10.6, and the current version seems to be 11. Kofax is cycling the capabilities of the product very quickly. One of the difficulties has been to actually keep up with the capabilities as they've evolved. On the one hand, it is good that the product is getting better, but on the other hand, it is difficult to implement the best way with a product that is evolving constantly."
"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 product has some constraints and performance issues."
"The scalability has room for improvement."
"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"For code version control, you need to use some external software."
"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."
"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 price should be reduced to make it more affordable."
"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."
"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tungsten RPA is ranked 12th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 24 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Tungsten RPA is rated 7.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Tungsten RPA writes "A stable product that provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Tungsten RPA is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA) and SAS Data Management, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our Tungsten RPA vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.