IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration Reviews

We develop EAI applications using webMethods using broker, TN, and IS. 

We use a Publish/Subscribe mechanism in every interface which we develop, because we have found this approach to be the best for every scenario.

It helps a lot. Most of the work can be more easily done by using webMethods compared to other tools.

Broker and UM are the best.

Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools. 

In our organization, we use many middleware tools. Out of all them, I found webMethods is the most efficient.

Typically, webMethods Server and Mediator is used as an ESB. webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators.

In my opinion, the best advantages are: 

• platform scaling
• graphical data mapper (Designer and webMethods Developer in oldest versions)
• integration BPM process layer with services
• service management via packages.

Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems.

Additionally, this product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing.

Very often there have been stability issues, but typically the source of problems was in the IS configuration or deployed services. Many of problems exist only in AX system (IBM JRE).

No scalability issues. Typically, you can not scale the solution if it is not well designed (architecture, service layers, data processing).

I had some problems with the webMethods support team. They provide fixes very often but sometimes they do not work properly.

Yes, even currently I am using other suppliers' products. The main reason for this situation is that the solution was chosen by the company, and changing technologies is very expensive.

Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client.

I think this is a very good and mature solution, but you have to be aware of the pricing. You can use an open-source solution and spend the money saved on licensing for a custom implementation.

All of them are helpful.

It facilitates

• communication between a lot of applications
• maintainability and security and
• facilitates the integration of new applications.

Software AG should investigate the reporting of products like Spotfire from TIBCO.

Two years.

No problem with stability in versions 6 and 7.

No problem with scalability in versions 6 and 7.

I have not encountered a situation that requires technical support.

Yes, I've used TIBCO products like BW, BPM, and Spotfire. I switched because the fist project was finished and the company just had products of the TIBCO type.

I only use the product in the company where I work. The company bought the product so I don't have any idea.

Product is easy to use and work on, very interesting and very helpful.

How simple it is to create new solutions.

It is an integration platform, so it has improved my organization by giving it one common platform to work with multiple systems.

12 years.

Yes, somewhat.

In terms of scale, I would give it a four out of 10.

Yes. I was sent to a different company, and due to this, I switched solutions that I was working in. The company hasn't switch integration platforms since I have been working in this position (almost 10 years).

I was in the company when they only started with webMethods. It used to be a very simple solution used for a few integrations. Now, it is much more complex. We've got many more frameworks, multiple countries, much more services, etc.

I'm not involved in this.

The company evaluated that. I wasn't included in this. Also, we did another evaluation a few years back when the company was wondering if we shouldn't switch to a different solution. We stayed with webMethods.

The Integration Server and Trading Networks Server. They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform.

It has helped us streamline data from hundreds of non-SAP systems into the SAP system.

Ten-plus years.

Yes, there is still plenty of room for improvement in MWS, SAG Designer.

Not much.

On a scale of one to 10, around seven.

No we didn't use any other suite of EAI products.

I don't have insight on the pricing.

I have no information on that.

Upgrade to recent versions has improved things considerably compared to older versions.

This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support.

CentraSite for governance and life cycle management. It frankly fills the gap between IT and business by having approval and policy enforcement on each state and cycle of the asset from the moment it gets created until it is retired.

It becomes the only integration platform through which any external/internal data exchange does any web services. Below are more details:

• There are many projects in the organization which need data from external entities and all integration endpoints implemented using webMethods integration platform.
• Departments in the organization currently understand what to exchange and in what type by having an enterprise data model in webMethods integration platform.
• Business users are involved in any integration as approvals have to take place throughout the lifecycle of the service.
• Reports and dashboards give management a big picture of the integration usage and potential bottlenecks.

Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial.

Eight years using the following different product versions:

• webMethods API Management platform – CentraSite, Mediator, API Portal, API Gateway
• webMethods Integration Server
• webMethods Universal Messaging
• Terracotta In-Memory
• webMethods Business Process Management
• webMethods Optimize for Process

No.

No.

Good as long the support request is clear and justified.

Yes, Adobe LiveCycle ES4. Adobe LiveCycle is superior when it comes to UI and process development, whereas, the integration capabilities are less compared to webMethods.

Complex. Lots of configuration parameters have to be set to guarantee a solid platform. Some of these parameters are not mentioned in the product documentation!

Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials.

No.

• Requirements for API life cycle model should be gathered carefully.
• Consider SOA governance and don’t impose lots of policies that restrict the visibility of assets/services.
• Always consider an enterprise data model for service integration and business processes.
• Define potential KPIs for process optimization during the process definition phase, not during the implementation.
• Consider In-Memory while clustering the servers and developing services.
• Consider an asynchronous integration pattern to guarantee the delivery.

It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career.

It has all the features required to integrate and manage file transfers, Partner Management, logging mechanisms, adapters for mainframes, SAP, and many others.

Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness.

I have been using this product stack for several years now.

There were no deployment issues.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues on-premises, but I have yet to check with the virtualization concepts and cloud scalability coming up.

Customer service is good.

Technical support is good.

We did not try another solution previously.

The setup was well-documented.

We implemented with an internal team and we had vendor support.

It is worth the cost.

We checked with TIBCO for EAI and the MQ series for messaging.

It is a good product stack.

Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features.

We have used webMethods because of its ubiquitous nature to talk to various technology platforms. Also, the solution had a finite life, webMethods provided a quick integration solution since it is relatively easier to implement, and also, it can hold the business logic in itself.

The client was planning to go in for a separate data exchange platform/Business Information Warehouse as a large-scale global project slated to be alive after five years.

It helped to improve the efficacy of production planning to the market demands and it has improved the quality due to faster information on quality issues.

Mostly, an improvement is needed in the product's documentation.

The documentation deficiencies were in the following areas; since it has been a while, I could recall the top instances where the escalation reached to my level.

wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well.

Release Notes: Used to cover only the latest update for the SAP changes. What has been done to the older version (SAP R/3 4.6, etc.) were not mentioned.

I have used this solution for nearly a year.

In 2008, the technical support's response time was much longer than expected.

There was an implementation issue, i.e., some of the preconditions were not clearly mentioned, so we had to dig through multiple options to troubleshoot and find the right steps.

It was an Enterprise license and I am not sure of the current status.

We evaluated TIBCO.

Put the business first, consider the business architecture and requirements before deciding to go with webMethods. Today, there are multiple open-source, cheaper solutions like Talend available and we can consider those as well.

• Capability to handle almost all e-business standards: RosettaNet, EDI, ebXML Messaging Service, SWIFT, FIX, and CIDX
• Web-based user interface: Makes administration and monitoring much easier
• Segregation of user tasks: Controlled user permissions and gives better control over the TN environment
• Clear view of transactions: Makes analysis and monitoring easier
• Capability to set up Trading Partner Agreements (TPAs): Makes business secure and more efficient

• We could set up all trading partners in one place with different data transfer protocols
• Makes the middleware environment more efficient
• Helps the admin team: Has a clear view on transactions and their processing status without digging into actual implementations

Configuration and interaction of trading partners in the TN with an ActiveTransfer product.

I have been using this solution for nine years.

New deployer could handle almost all deployment related task for TN components.

We had some minor issues with the EDIINT module which were resolved in the newer version.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I would rate the technical support at quite a high level.

We did not use any other solution previously.

The setup was straightforward.

It is an add-on product to the webMethods product suite. The capability it offers is at a very good price.

We did not evaluate any other options as we already had the webMethods product suite. It was more logical to go for the SAG product.

It gives value for your money. It is easy to implement and maintain.

webMethods provides the ESB backbone for us since more than 8 years without any hick ups

High throughput and excellent scalability.

Programming model with flow is hopelessly outdated. Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS

ESB is rock solid. Products on top of Integration Server have much less stability.

No. Absolute top.

Webmethods ESB works, but support is layered an requires escalation every so often

We used IBM MQ Series and migrated due to licensing issues.

Significant topics with bespoke programming model (FLOW language), difficult to find experts and if, they are expensive. Wouldn't do it again.

Mixed team with vendor.

N/A

Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements.

It's a rather mature solution with lot's of design choices we would not accept in 2017. We are in fact considering to leave to other products.