Oracle Fusion Middleware Reviews

We use Oracle Identity Management in the middle of all systems. We get the information from Human Resources. We provision the production systems and the users get reviews. 

We currently have 200+ Oracle databases, 60+ Microsoft databases, and other applications for a total of 500+ systems.

Oracle Fusion Middleware doesn't change our organization in any way. With Oracle Identity Management, we deployed the product according to the needs of the organization for a worst-case scenario. 

The most valuable feature is the structure of the product. We use Oracle Fusion Middleware to manage the Oracle database. Registered users can go to each product if sign-on credentials match each user's identical framework. 

For most users, Oracle Identity Management is not user-friendly so we use another tool for the user interface. We don't use Oracle's main interface for work logs & requests.

The main improvement must be made on the user interface. You need to use another Oracle cross in this product. It must be improved and some features of the connectors must be changed.

This product trusts the system or itself, that it helps provision attributes to the department of its system, but if there's an error, it puts the values to the Chi table and doesn't delete it. 

There must be a fulfillment page. If the part of the system has an error, it must delete the attribute from the Chi table also. 

The problem is, when you open the product, it saves the user's attributes as part of its system but when you look at the target system, there are no attributes about that count. 

There must be an improved fulfillment page. Maybe the connector structure of the product must be changed in that way to meet these requirements.

In summary: easier, more close, and a stable graphical user interface, which was written with new technology. It would be nice if they develop these features in the near future.

Oracle Identity Management seems stable, but we made many improvements in the last three years. We had to change and review the code. There's still a project ongoing about that. You don't know how it was written or other developer outputs. 

We have to check it and we need to see many improvements in that. We highly increased the provisioning sign using the correct data structures.

We have no problem with scalability. We use Oracle Identity Management at one of the largest companies in telecommunications. We have 500 private systems in the product. We have no problem with scalability at this point with 40,000 users.

We have six people for its operation. For development, we use Accenture and four or five dedicated people. There are six more people required for the operation of OIM in the company.

We don't need technical support. The people in the company know the product, so we don't need technical support at this point.

There was some previous use of IBM, Sun, & Oracle products (before the merger) by our company, as well as mobile and third-party utilities for identity management.

The set up of the platform was outsourced to Accenture by the organization.

We made deployments short in other environments, for example, in other telecommunication companies. At this company, we each worry about inner problems. 

I heard that it took a long time to make deployment and migration. It required about one month, I heard from my colleagues. They used the Accenture company.

It's complicated. The company is a big company and it's about security. Sometimes it cannot be easier. 

Return on Investment for security: you have to do it, and you do it.

The company does not pay licensing for the product because we are part of the Oracle Association.

We have a cause to get all the private systems in IBM by the end of this year.

Oracle is popular in our enterprise because of the name regulations and in Europe with the GDPR. Other companies are hoping to use this product, but we hear that some of them want to use Atlassian and other IBM solutions.

We can advise any enterprise organization to use this product because you can trust this product. It's a brand name product in identity management. I can recommend this product if you are looking for an easy username log for personnel changes. It's about your needs.

I would rate the product 7.5 out of 10. It can be a 10 if the improvements happen.

Initially, we used the solution for Procure to Pay (P2P) for automation.

The solution is very easy to install. We can easily integrate with the help of Tosca, but we cannot navigate the forms in Selenium and cannot process them in particular. We can navigate wherever we want in Tosca and easily switch over without any complications. Selenium has more complications when navigating one web application into forms.

It is very difficult to automate in a desktop application, whereas it is very easy in Tosca. We need to get an authentication certificate for everything, including Tosca servers. We need to enable that with the help of root certifications on our configuration. Security is not a complicated part for Tosca.

We have four methods, namely, identify by property, anchor, image, and index. For Oracle Fusion Middleware's testing instance, we are trying all the objects with the help of the index. From the Tosca perspective, we need to use the index only in rare cases. We are continuously using the index, but we need to automate with the help of the properties alone and not with the index.

My team is automating with the help of the index, which is the main issue we are facing right now. We have created a ticket, and the support team is also trying to resolve it, but it has not yet been resolved. The solution's technical support needs to be improved.

I have been using Oracle Fusion Middleware for one year.

Oracle Fusion Middleware is a highly stable solution.

We haven’t faced any issues with the solution’s scalability.

The solution's technical support needs to be improved. The support team takes one or two days to respond whenever we raise an issue. Again, we are reaching out. It takes more than one week for a demo. If we contact the support team, they will not respond as quickly.

During live chats, they say they will reach out to us in ten minutes. After that, we are on the same page, but they will tell you that you have navigated and moved to the next page. They say you have left the chat, and they close the ticket, which is very bad.

The solution is very easy to install. We do not need any installation since we are using a web application. Initially, it takes time to load the Java page, but it is very easy after that.

We need to maintain the solution because we get synchronization errors most of the time. We are increasing the settings, but it has not yet been resolved. We need to force close Tosca, launch it, and run it again for it to work fine. It works fine whenever we run the individual test cases, but we often face issues if we want to run entire test cases. That's why we need to maintain the solution.

The support team doesn't know how we need to troubleshoot the issue, and it takes one week. When I create a ticket, I ask for a demo, which gets delayed for one week. We are facing issues because my team asked for a demo, but it took longer.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Oracle Service Bus is the most valuable feature of the solution.

The product should improve BPEL features.

I have been using the solution for more than ten years.

I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. About 25 people in the organization use the solution.

I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten.

The deployment process was very complex. A team of 12 people deployed the solution in one and a half months.

I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.

Our client does not want to risk updating the product because of its stability. If an organization has a lot of people with Java skills, I would suggest Oracle Fusion over webMethods. It depends on the skills and the labor in the organization. It also depends on the legacy systems of the organization, whether they are built upon Oracle, SAP, or IBM. If an organization is completely on Oracle, it must choose Oracle Stack. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use Oracle Fusion Middleware particularly within the telco domain, where it is in extensive use integrating all the order management, number management, publishing, and much more.

During the time that we were setting up our application server and various apps, we found that the implementation was becoming more and more complex, especially regarding flexibility. Our web services were providing so many different products for different scenarios, and so we decided, "Let's go with the one product which gathers all our needs together."

When we analyzed Oracle Fusion Middleware from that perspective, we found that it would be very useful, because in one product we could have access to all the needed solutions, solving all the problems in one go. That was our main driving criteria.

The other important criteria we had was the ability to deal with the reality of technical knots and difficulties in future, so knowing that we have the support of a brand like Oracle has helped us deal with various challenges. In terms of skill levels, we have quite a lot of guys in the market, and one requirement was that we did not want to become vendor-locked into a support system that would not look after us properly. In this way, Oracle's support system became one of the driving factors that kept us with their product. 

Fusion Middleware's main feature for me is that it is quite flexible, and, as middleware, it provides us with all sorts of technology and application adapters, which makes it very handy to use.

An improvement for Oracle's Fusion Middleware could definitely be found in the SOA component. It's a heavyweight container and, if you ask me, if a product is available as a docker image where we can easily port it in to another Kubernetes platform, that would be perfect. But as for the current situation in the market, nobody is really willing to deploy this on premises.

With traditional software, everyone is looking for something which is portable and works well on a platform like Kubernetes. If Oracle can come with that feature for their SOA, it would be quite useful.

Beyond that, I would expect that the monitoring of various components be more flexible and more detailed. Right now, if you want to do the monitoring of your infrastructure and the services running inside, you will often need to hook up third-party apps and plugins. If Oracle can also achieve cloud-native versions of these kinds of plugins, that would certainly give it more points in my eyes, and it would have a fair share of the market once again.

I have been using Oracle Fusion Middleware for close to 12 years. 

It is stable in my experience. 

It is indeed scalable. 

The technical support is fantastic. 

We were originally going to use Red Hat Fuse, but we were not able to implement it for certain reasons at a higher level of requirements.

The setup was easy; we did it ourselves. 

The licensing costs are reasonable. 

Before we went with Oracle, we were looking into Red Hat Fuse — in particular, the Kubernetes version — mainly because of its open source nature. We actually went ahead with it to a certain extent and we found it quite useful, but customers didn't give us any room for it.

Earlier they had said they would also go ahead with it, but there were certain conditions that couldn't be met at a higher level and so we couldn't use Red Hat Fuse. Otherwise, I think it is also a good product.

When deciding whether to use Oracle Fusion Middleware or another solution such as MuleSoft, there are many different factors to consider. However, the main thing I would suggest to look at is where the product fits in with all the scenarios where you will use it. MuleSoft, for example, comes with an API management layer and more all in one, whereas Red Hat Fuse is quite a different product and seems to be lagging behind in this sense.

On the whole, if you are looking for one product that is flexible, easy to use, and versatile for many different scenarios, then I would definitely recommend Oracle Fusion Middleware.

I would rate Oracle Fusion Middleware an eight out of ten. 

Oracle Fusion Middleware is an ERP system. It is not an E-business and it is on-premise. However, the cloud version which we are using is for HR. We use it in many areas, such as finance, procurement, SEM, and supply chains.

This solution has improved the way our organization functions because it does the issuing of BOs, purchasing orders, purchasing requests, and we monitor the cost for projects on it. Additionally, we use it for making the payroll for employees.

Oracle Fusion Middleware is based on the regulations in Saudi Arabia and the legislation changes. There is a need to be improvements all the time. It needs to adapt quickly in this market. Additionally, there could be some improvements in the construction sector.

I have been using Oracle Fusion Middleware for approximately five years.

The solution is stable, but we have had some bugs.

The scalability is good.

There are more than 100 people using this solution and we do not have plans to increase usage.

We have used the support from Oracle Fusion Middleware.

The initial implementation is not straightforward. However, it can depend on the requirements. The full implementation took one year.

We used an implementor for the deployment, and there is no maintenance because it is cloud-based.

We have received some return on investments in some projects.

We pay annually for the solution.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution is for them to make the processes and the organization structure decisions before choosing any ERP.

For the construction sector, I would rate Oracle Fusion Middleware six out of ten.

Overall, I rate Oracle Fusion Middleware a nine out of ten.

It's like an umbrella under which we're using a group of products. We have about 20 to 30 people using it right now.

I've been using Oracle Fusion Middleware for a few years.

Oracle Fusion is stable.

Setting up Oracle Fusion is straightforward.

We currently have a yearly license. The price could always be better. 

I rate Oracle Fusion Middleware eight out of 10. I would recommend it. 

We mainly use it for human resources. We use it for self-service, payroll, and performance management.

It is really good in terms of features, and it is stable. 

Its price can be improved. We are currently looking for more cost-efficiency.

It should also have a little bit more flexibility for customizations. The customizations should be quicker.

I have been using Oracle Fusion Middleware for almost a year.

It is stable.

It is scalable. 

Their technical support is good.

The initial setup was straightforward. It took a bit of time for payroll in terms of customization. It took us a year's time to deploy it.

We worked with a consulting firm for deployment. We had two people from our department.

It is expensive. We are looking for a cheaper solution. 

You should have a mature company to use this solution. It is suitable for big companies, not for small companies. We are currently looking for another solution that is a little bit cheaper but has the same quality. We are thinking of SAP, but we are not really sure if it is cheaper or not.

I would rate Oracle Fusion Middleware a seven out of ten.

We usually implement HCM for other companies.

All our customers agree, the HR business process execution is much easier and their lives have become better.

Data integrity.

The modules that I have experienced that need improvement are:

• HR Core
• Payroll
• Absence
• WF Compensation.

Though all areas of HCM modules could use some improvement.

No issues.

Minor issues.

I would rate the technical support as an eight out of 10.

No.

It is different based on every customer's requirements.

My advice is to buy the basic modules first, gain the most benefit from them, then buy the advanced modules.

No.

Choose an excellent consultant to implement.