BizTalk Server vs OpenText MBPM comparison

"Essentially, you can do whatever you like with these systems, and you do not have to take care about the scaling because if one server is overloaded, it just forwards the message to the next server, even if it were designated to a specific server. It weeds out the messages according to the load. If you want to scale it, you just add new servers."

"The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good."

"The BizTalk Server business rule engine was very useful for us and has helped us for the last 12 years."

"BIzTalk's integration with Visual Studio is the most valuable feature of this product."

"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."

"The most valuable feature is its reliability and stability. The first version of BizTalk was released in 2000, and many companies still use it. It was stable until 2013 when we had support."

"BizTalk Server offers workflow functionality that I find very effective for process automation."

"Compared to the current solutions I use, like Azure Logic Apps and other cloud services, BizTalk was far better and more reliable."

"Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."

"The product's deployment can be quicker"

"I didn't find anything particularly valuable in BizTalk Server. It didn't help me, and we are moving away from BizTalk Server to a new platform."

"Updating things in BizTalk is a headache."

"The product could be improved in monitoring, managing, and support functionalities."

"It's a complex product because you have many degrees of freedom to connect different parts together. Whether it's sensible or not, is up to you, but the machine does allow it. But because of the vast degrees of freedom, it's complex."

"We want to get rid of BizTalk Server, as there is unnecessary license cost, and there are some limitations, so we might go for Azure Integration Services."

"BizTalk Server needs improvements, especially because we use it for EDI messaging, and it would be very useful to have enhanced tracking capabilities for message tracking and archiving of messages."

"It's an on-premises system, requiring physical servers for deployment. This is different from Azure; you don't need any servers with Azure. If you have a subscription, you can do whatever you want. There are unit restrictions based on the environment (like non-production vs. production) in BizTalk. You need physical servers and databases. In Azure, those are not required – it's all in the cloud."

"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."

"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."

"It was not cheap, but it was affordable."

"The cost will depend on the client's requirements."

"BizTalk Server is cheap. I would rate its pricing a two out of five."

"BizTalk Server is not freeware. There's a significant licensing cost involved. Be sure you will actually utilize its features fully."

"The solution is expensive."

"Based on the knowledge, it is relatively cheaper than Azure Identity Services and cloud services in general."

"There is an annual license to use OpenText MBPM."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cost-efficient, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing somewhere between nine and ten since it is a costly solution."