There is a minor need to improve the ease of configuration. The configuration of the product is not an easy task for everyone. I agree that it has to be that way, as it's a good technology, however, maybe for people with low experience it can be hard. There can be a higher learning curve.

The setup can be difficult for those not familiar with the solution. 

I'd like to see the possibility of configuring the product via consoles with more elasticity without having the need to go to the single files in the file system, add the files manually, and then restarting. We'd like to make some changes, some tuning of the product, using the administration console. If this is extended to the console, it would be great. We need more operations done by the console. It simplifies the life of the worker.

WSO2 libraries are not mature enough. For example, if you want to integrate with Kafka using its Kafka library, it often has many bugs. So, you have to report those bugs, and WSO2 will provide fixes. The support team is quite good, but the product's library maturity is lacking. When integrating with a new system, messaging queue, or database, you cannot trust it to work flawlessly in production. It will have bugs that the support team will fix the issue, but it will have bugs.

In additional features, it would be great if WSO2 improved its integration studio and provided better documentation. Currently, WSO2's documentation is very bad, and it would be helpful to have more comprehensive and reliable resources. If WSO2 addresses these aspects, it would greatly enhance the product. And also if WSO2 enhances its integration studio. WSO2 has made improvements, but there's still room for further enhancement.

In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience.

The most valuable feature of the WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, especially in the new version, is its enhanced capabilities for DevOps. This integration platform offers advanced features that greatly facilitate and streamline the DevOps processes.

There is room for improvement in the administration side of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. It is complex. This area is often overlooked but has great potential to enhance the solution's functionality. Making significant improvements to the administrative part, it could make the integration process smoother and easier for users. 

The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

There is a need to improve on the product's security aspect when it comes to WSO2 Enterprise Integrator.

The IDE part can be better in the product.

One of the weaknesses is that sometimes a signature is needed to make it work according to your requirements, and therefore properly support the system. It can be very expensive.

They should introduce better pricing for small companies.

In my opinion, all of their products come with a very expensive support model. Their business model has one license for product users and a different license for resellers. But the license can get expensive when any issues arise, and either troubleshooting or maintenance is needed, or there is a need for new packets.

In this way, they try to lock the clients in for three to five years. They make sure they have regular revenue coming in. It is not right from a client's or a user's perspective. Until the time we implement it for real usage, we couldn't see the actual issues with it. Once we find them, we have to wait for the package to be applied, and then there's a lot of back-and-forth communication. The process depends on the classes that are specifically applied because it is a product that is available across the market for anyone. So every supplier tries to get a general version for each one. Some of the security patches are not compatible with the older versions. So the client is forced to upgrade.

The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components. Some workloads may benefit from optimization or additional features. Additionally, exploring the supported connections reveals opportunities for enhancement. While some connections may meet expectations, others may require workarounds due to limitations such as bandwidth availability. From a product perspective, there could be improvements by incorporating built-in connectors that are aligned with industry standards.

You cannot include the validation of XPath.

I would like to see the clustering feature written with a proper connection to WSO2 Enterprise Integrator servers. If a tool was available for developing some special interfaces and this tool could be through a wizard on the web interface itself, that would be helpful. I would like to see them bring back a feature, from early versions, that was very useful in debugging and finding issues.

The integration capabilities need to be improved. We hope to see better integration in the future. 

I don't know the whole history since I'm relatively new to the organization; however, the product that we use needs to be supported effectively. And for some time, we had paid for support, and yet we are not satisfied with the quality of service. Therefore, we just stopped using the service and the support, and now the product is being retired, as I understand.

One of the reasons that we are looking for a replacement is their way of defining integration. The language of the XML structures that I use to describe the integrations are not that standard, and it's not easy to find people who are familiar with this approach. Standardization of the programming on the configuration language would be an advantage.

I will need some time to reflect on improvements as we are still exploring the product. Maybe in another two or three months, I'd have more insights.

The customization can be a bit difficult.

They should release upgrades for the solution more frequently.

I would like to see easier customizations in the new WSO2 Enterprise Integrator versions. Most of the issues we run into with the WSO2 Enterprise Integrator deal with customizations.

Another problem that we run into is that our clients, which are mostly in government, do not want to put analytics on the cloud. So, I would like to see an on-premise analytics solution. In the last town hall call, they said they plan on introducing it in the future. 

The analytics has to be part of this or otherwise we will have to use an ELK or something similar. 

There are a lot of security settings that when you apply you have to re-apply again every time you modify a setting. It is something that really needs to be enhanced.

We had some challenges with the installation of this solution. We were using the open-source version with no support, and I expect that if we had the paid version then this would have been fixed.

I would like to see better documentation for the open-source version. 

The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it.