IBM App Connect Reviews

I primarily use App Connect for ETL and managing files in batch operations.

App Connect's best feature is that it can be deployed in a container.

The setup time for App Connect could be improved.

I've been using App Connect for ten years and the latest version for about a year.

App Connect is stable.

I would rate App Connect's scalability eight out of ten.

We get good technical support from the local IBM, though there's less support for older versions.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward so long as you have experience with the product and know about containers, but it takes a long time to complete.

Initially, App Connect was quite expensive because the cost was based on the number of processors we used. However, it's now based on containers, which means we can be more specific about our consumption and get a better price.

I would give App Connect a rating of eight out of ten.

Our primary use cases mostly revolve around orchestrating information between different data stores and I would say different applications as well. So we would be storing it in the operational data stores or we will be sending the information as files in one of the nodes or we will be sending it for monitoring. So basically it is just moving information from one place to another or doing some validations on the information and then putting them into a database.

I would say that we have a lot of modules in our applications. IBM App Connect has made it easier for us to segment the modules and deploy them separately on the integration server so that we can individually access them. At the same time, we also had a common module where we had a common function. We can utilize that for all the operations. So it gave us that independent isolation as well as the benefits of a shared common platform as well.

I would say that the most valuable feature is the array of connectors and integration tools. It is almost easy to connect to any data store or any other external application. I would say there's a good level of documentation on how to do the same as well as virtual. So I think that is one of the major strengths of IBM App Connect.

The user interface of IBM App Connect can be a little bit more user-friendly, I would say because the first-time developer is onboarded while using IBM App Connect, he or she may get a little intimidated or daunted looking at all the options available or the pipelines, et cetera. So a little bit on the user interfaces or how it looks like and how it can be perceived by a developer. Right now I believe that the command line integration tool is a separate tool for IBM App Connect. If I want to access items and work through the command line interface, I have to open up a separate one, I forgot the tool, and command line interface's name, but I need to open a separate tool and use that. But probably a native command line integration in IBM App Connect, which can help us validate our POCs or our code. That would be an interesting feature to have within the IBM App Connect product.

I have been using IBM App Connect for the past two years.

There is good stability.

Some of it was pretty straightforward. Some aspects of it were challenging. I am not exactly sure what the aspects were, but that is the feedback I heard. And sometimes when moving through versions, some forms of code might not work, but some code might work. So that is also another aspect they mentioned.

We did the deployment in-house. There were around four to five people on the team, but I believe only one to two people are working exclusively on the IBM App Connect infrastructure.

I think they are seeing a return on investment otherwise they would have moved to another solution. There is a lot of value and benefits being generated.

I would advise that make sure that the use case for which they are trying to implement is strong enough because IBM App Connect is a pretty heavy software because the programming language is not a traditional programming language on which you have to code, and they need to train employees also for the same and how to get everybody on board. You really need to evaluate the use case and identify whether IBM App Connect is the right technology platform for the particular use case and then go for it. I would rate IBM App Connect a nine out of ten.

App Connect works as a middleware tool. It connects the front and the back ends. I've used it for creating a service for generating net banking OTPs. We are partners with IBM and I'm a senior software engineer.

This latest version is very scalable, flexible and user-friendly. Another advantage of this version is that there's no dependency on the queue manager. I've seen this solution change over many years, and it's now compatible with many different kinds of software, different depositories, and many different testing tools. It's great in that it can be embedded with other kinds of technologies.

Plugins for the repositories are a little difficult to find. It requires some information in the toolkit and if there were some links, options, or search buttons that would simplify things. I would like to have some predefined plugins built-in to App Connect with a list to choose from because some people use SVN, some use GitHub, and others use Bitbucket.

The solution has a DFU mode which IBM states can easily be seen in the variables. It's not that easy to see and is lacking definition. When you're testing the code, you test it with the tool, but you also test the flow that you've created in the tool kit and see the values and what has been created in between the flows. I would want to see it presented in a more defined manner so that it's easy to view while you are debugging. I'd like to have more visibility when testing and debugging the code.

I've been using this tool for almost eight years. 

The product is quite stable. If there are any issues, they're generally resolved very quickly. We had issues using some shared or static library. If you changed a particular element, it had to be redeployed.

The cloud option is much more scalable because it's easier to make changes and remove some code. 

I don't work directly with tech support but I know they are very quick in dealing with fixes. Some can be dealt with on the spot but if it requires rolling out a fix, they create a ticket and are very responsive. 

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. You get an installer, and click on it and it asks where to create the workspace. That's all it takes. 

I rate this product eight out of 10. 

We use the solution to integrate IR adaptors in SAP systems and Microsoft Graph APIs in SharePoint systems. We also use it for SFTP, STP, HTTP and REST endpoint files. 

The solution is fast and supports Open UI 3.0 certification. 

The addition of string functionality would be a benefit, particularly in the ESQL space that IBM already uses internally. If you have non-unique elements but need unique elements, you must write code. 

For example, Java provides one function for obtaining unique values. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution's stability is good. The product is new so we pick up issues and raise them with IBM. We raised two PMRs and received a fixed pack for one of them within a few months.  

The solution is easy to scale. We have many purchasers and more than 10,000 transaction requests route from ACE to the solution with no performance issues. 

Critical issues are resolved quickly by technical support, but there is a delay in response to items related to the product, deployment, or low production environments.  

My colleagues and I have discussed that PMRs will take some time to resolve because the product is newer and only launched a few years ago. 

If a customer reports an issue, support should at least acknowledge it quickly. 

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward with no issues. 

Our DevOps team implemented the solution in-house and deployed it easily. We have multiple jobs in our environment so it takes less than a minute to deploy applications. 

The solution is a good product in the integration space and a leader in the market. It allows integration with any applications and any code systems. Anyone in need of an integration tool should consider this product. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use the product mainly for the integration of enterprise applications.

The platform's most valuable feature is ease of use. It has an efficient design flow. We can receive or use the resources and integrate them with other software as gateway integrations.

More connectors could be available for the product as some of the third-party software doesn't have default connectors.

We have been using IBM App Connect for three years.

The product's stability itself has been quite reliable. However, we encounter a few issues while shifting to a recognized environment. It wasn't a product issue but a platform issue. Now, a lot of issues have been resolved.

The product's scalability in a containerized environment is notably advantageous. Scaling up or down is straightforward and highly flexible, responding directly to your company's requirements and the continuous environment it operates within. We can easily add up more machines or scale down when needed. In contrast, deploying it as a VM is a slow process.

A team of five developers works on integration within the Android and Firewall systems. Tracking the number of integrations created is not straightforward, but from initial checks, around 20 integration servers are established, handling various integration points or tasks.

Most of my interactions with customer service and support were related to infrastructure queries rather than platform-specific issues. Initially, when we began using the containerization approach, some hidden issues were inherent to this new method, which required support. While I would classify the support as something other than the best, they eventually resolve issues. Quick responses were typical for simpler queries, but resolution could take anywhere from a week to two weeks for more complex or bug-related issues. For these instances, they often needed to escalate the matter to their development team for a comprehensive solution.

Neutral

The cloud platform integration's complexity depends on the prior experience working with it. For a beginner, the process would take a lot of work. It is straightforward once one gets familiar with it.

In implementing IBM App Connect, multiple options are available, each with its complexity and steps. You can set it up on a single virtual machine, which is comparatively simpler. Next, deploying it within a Kubernetes environment or as a Docker container requires additional steps for configuration but provides more flexibility. The recommended approach is deploying in OpenShift, which offers advantages but might involve a more comprehensive setup process.

Utilizing pre-existing operators created by IBM significantly simplifies the setup, reducing complexity for implementation. Once set up, developers gain convenient access, enabling them to swiftly create the instances, possibly automating the process with minimal effort. This advantage makes the Kubernetes or OpenShift environment particularly favorable, offering scalability and ease of use for App Connect instances.

Various roles handle different aspects of IBM App Connect deployment and management in organizational settings. For instance, an integration specialist or administrator may focus on IBM App Connect's configuration and management, while developers require access to the environment for development. Additionally, some organizations might have specific roles dedicated to supporting production environments, restricting access accordingly. While in certain scenarios, one person might fulfill multiple roles; larger organizations tend to separate these responsibilities among different individuals or teams to maintain control, security, and proper governance over the deployment and usage of the product.

It is easy to maintain. When IBM releases a new version or features, upgrading to these updates via the new operator is relatively straightforward. It typically involves just a few clicks to upgrade to the latest version. While there are considerations and guidelines to follow during these updates, adhering to these steps makes the process simple and manageable. Overall, with proper adherence to guidelines and instructions, the maintenance, updates, and upgrades within Kubernetes environments are simple and can be handled efficiently.

The ROI for the platform at my current customer's site predominantly revolves around long-term usage and centralizing integrations. It proves beneficial in managing critical operations like banking. By avoiding issues from scattered integration points, the time taken to resolve problems has notably decreased, contributing to operational efficiency. However, quantifying the exact financial savings, particularly regarding reduced downtime or post-implementation updates, would require detailed analysis by someone well-versed in the financial aspects.

IBM App Connect is a part of Cloud Pak. Thus, it benefits us with the ease of integration of multiple components. We can overview the integration capabilities as well.

Those using IBM App Connect should opt for a containerized solution rather than a VPN-based one. Containerization offers greater flexibility and can resolve several issues compared to a more traditional VPN setup.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use IBM App Connect for business use cases involving data transformations. It can perform tasks such as converting XML to JSON, XML to CSV, or vice versa. Additionally, it can handle API conversions with mapping and transformation rules, simplifying the development process. It offers security features for APIs. It includes support for TLS (Transport Layer Security) and encryption mechanisms.

IBM App Connect should improve security features and have a faster mechanism than MuleSoft, which has better capabilities.

We have been using IBM App Connect for eight years.

The product's stability is good. However, we encounter issues with complex services. I rate its stability a seven out of ten.

It is a scalable platform. I rate its scalability an eight and a half out of ten.

The technical support services need improvement in terms of response time.

Neutral

I have used MuleSoft before. Both products have similar capabilities. Large enterprises use App Connect more, while MuleSoft is more suitable for medium or small enterprises.

The product's deployment for on-premise servers is easy. At the same time, it is tedious to deploy on clusters. We use the DevOps pipeline for on-cloud deployments. It takes a few seconds to complete the process.

I rate IBM App Connect an eight out of ten. I recommend others for the product if you need to build highly scalable and secured services. In the case of services for enterprises with a high volume of APIs, I advise them to use the enterprise version of the product.

App Connect is useful for monitoring APAC and API. It allows us to do analysis based on the dashboards, and it's mostly used for security.

We have almost 10 million transactions per day.

It's a cloud solution.

The most valuable feature is the security. The agreement relies on DataPower, so if you're calling APIs to publish to the internet, you definitely need the security.

In the next release, I would like to get some quality connectors. With the configuration of MuleSoft, they have multiple connectors if you're going with the quicker stuff. There's IBM Professional and IBM Enterprise solution. IBM Professional will have all the connector things, but I'm expecting that to be included on-premise as well.

IBM should be competitive on the third party cloud side of integration so that we can do the development quickly. It would also be very useful for the cost effectiveness of project development.

I've been using this solution for almost one year.

It's a stable solution.

It's scalable.

There is a laptop vulnerability, so we connected with IBM's tech support about that.

The amount of people needed for deployment and maintenance will depend on the project. For example, we are a financial team working as a GBS, Global Business Service. Based on the project, we have two developers and a DBA.

We always have ROI when we use IBM products. If you're using multiple products from IBM, you will see ROI. If not, you'll definitely see some variation.

The cost depends upon the consumer. Right now, the cost is within $10,000 per year, based on the transactions. The license depends on if you're a premium partner, platinum partner, or golden partner.

I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

I would definitely recommend this solution to those who are interested in using it. Banks around the world use IBM App Connect.

We use this solution to connect with MQ. We manage the solution and send the results.

It's stable to use, connect with the cloud, and to deploy.

The interface could be better.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

Technical support takes time to respond.

Neutral

Initial setup isn't easy. It's medium difficulty.

You need between two and five people for deployment.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.