The solution is a middleware integration tool. It's a deployment part where you deploy your Mule applications and also use Anypoint Studio.
It's like other integration tools like TIBCO.
The solution is a middleware integration tool. It's a deployment part where you deploy your Mule applications and also use Anypoint Studio.
It's like other integration tools like TIBCO.
Mule Anypoint Platform has a good feature for batch processes where the internal tool handles everything. You don't have to handle it by yourself. If you have a large amount of data that needs to be processed, then batch processing is a very helpful part of Mule.
The product is quick to deploy and pretty straightforward.
It can scale.
The pricing is pretty good.
The stability could be better. That said, they are also getting stabilized as part of increasing the versions and working on that. Previously, Mule version 3 was, of course, very unstable. However, now, version four is pretty stable now.
There have not been very good resources to help us find solutions to issues.
I've been using the solution for around two or three years.
The stability is getting better and continues to improve, however, previous versions were quite unstable.
It's a scalable product. If you create an image, a docker image, then you can scale it automatically. There are no issues.
We have onsite people who can help with the technical support. They have access to Mule support. I have sent a couple of queries to them, and they have contacted Mule to resolve any issues. I personally have not contacted Mule support directly.
I'm familiar with TIBCO. TIBCO has a PW container edition, and they're similar. However, PW is using expert language for internal and external transformation. Mule is using the database transformation. That database transformation, it's a totally new language. If you want to use the Mule, then you should have experience in that first.
Mule is a very good competitor of TIBCO, and Salesforce has acquired Mule. So the market has also grown drastically for Mule.
We may have also moved based on the price, of which Mule's is better.
If they used XPath, XML query language, instead of DataWeave, it would be ideal. That way, our users don't need to worry about knowing a different language.
The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult.
If you're deploying your cloud hub, then it takes time to deploy. That said, if you have that setup on your private crowd, then it takes a couple of seconds or a couple of minutes. It's very fast.
While I'm not sure of the exact cost, it is reasonable, and less than TIBCO.
We are a Mule partner.
When working with customers, we use both cloud and on-premises deployments.
I'd recommend Mule to others. It is good in web surveys, REST APIs, and is easy to use. Also, they need to be aware that with Mule, they will have to understand the DataWeave expression language. If you use DataWeave expression language, then the processing time and performance also increase.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I've used the application heavily and taken projects to production. I know it well.
Our company is working with a client to create standardization or uniformity across departments and domains.
Every domain operated on a pilot approach with its own set of standards and technology. There were multiple point form connections and API discoverability for assets.
We analyzed the environment and found there were issues with transferring master data from SAP to downstream systems. There was an iDOC on the SAP level which contained a batch master for new material and served as a point-to-point connector for downstream systems such as SAP to Salesforce, Informatica, or other systems.
We recommended that material master data should be implemented in an observable or pub/sub approach. Upgrades or changes to the material master should be generated from the CP side and sent to the solution for dissemination to downstream systems. This eliminates bad jobs and is a real-time approach to point-to-point connections.
There were also many APIs built in different technologies throughout the organization, with no standard API management capabilities or governance to enforce policies, security, or best practices. We recommended Universal API Management for API registrations because it allows any type of technology or platform and serves as a single point for discoverability, enforced policies, governance, and traffic.
The exchange and API management features are the best in the market.
The solution handles EDI-based integrations very well.
The platform's data integration tools need improvement on the processing side. We move large amounts of data from databases to other source systems and the solution does not handle this well.
It is difficult to become a partner with the solution because their standards are very high.
I have been using the solution for four years.
The solution is stable.
The solution is scalable and depends on your deployment model. With Cloud Orbit, it is very easy to scale or configure auto scaling. On-premises or private clouds require a bit of extra care but are still easy to do.
Technical support for partners and customers is good and the community forum for developers is strong.
I rate support an eight out of ten.
Positive
The setup is very simple.
The solution is the priciest in the market which is an issue for some clients. It is intended for use with enterprise or mid-level companies who have available resources.
When comparing products, the solution wins every time for integration capabilities and API management but falls short for pricing. Demographics play an important role because clients in Asia cannot afford the solution but price is not an issue for clients in the US, Australia, Canada and Europe. The size of a company is also important as the solution is intended for the enterprise or mid-level range.
The solution is more focused on EDI-based integrations and has a partner that offers an onboarding management tool because many legacy companies are migrating from Sterling Integrator. Perhaps the solution should be marketed more for EDI integrations.
There are more valid tools for data integration such as Informatica, SSI, and Talend.
The solution is great for new developers who want to learn about integrations because it includes free or self-payer courses.
I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
We use the infrastructure of the Mule Anypoint Platform to host our application and services on Amazon. We are end-users and I'm a technical delivery manager.
The most valuable feature of this solution is the ease of developing APIs. It's very, very easy and very fast. Anypoint offers good performance and security.
The pricing should be improved, it's an expensive product.
I've been using this solution for six years.
The solution is stable.
The scalability is good but again, you need to be aware that if you want to scale up your APIs, it requires spending more.
We're not so happy with the technical support, it could definitely be improved.
Generally, deployment of one API wouldn't take more than 10-15 minutes. We use CICD DevOps for our deployment strategy and it's carried out in-house. We use this product continuously and extensively.
It's important to be aware of the cost implications of using this solution. Unless you know the extent to which you are going to use MuleSoft, you'll begin with a handful of APIs that need to be developed and then you'll start implementing more and more until you realize it's become quite expensive.
I rate this solution eight out of 10.
The tool's use cases are mainly for enterprise-level integrations that require transformations and major publish-subscribe scenarios in which data needs to be published to multiple systems in different formats.
I rate the solution's ease of learning a nine out of ten. It has good documentation and self-learning videos. It promotes usability and provides an end-to-end integration solution with the Salesforce ecosystem
The tool helps with order management and automates the enterprise's orchestration, invoice creation, product maintenance, and product life cycle. The API manager feature helps us configure, secure, and call APIs.
The tool requires programming language.
I rate Mule Anypoint Platform's stability as nine out of ten.
I rate Mule Anypoint Platform's scalability as nine out of ten.
The solution's deployment is 10-20 percent longer.
We have a team to deploy the tool.
The tool's pricing is cheaper than other RPAs' since it is execution-based. Other RPAs charge based on subscriptions.
I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
I would recommend Anypoint MQ to customers using MuleSoft as an integration platform. Anypoint MQ is a pure messaging product. The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good.
The solution's licensing model is expensive and could be improved.
I've recently started using Anypoint MQ.
The solution’s technical support is good, but they should work on their response time.
Neutral
Anypoint MQ is easy to configure. However, it is not that easy when compared to Apache Kafka.
If customers using open-source integration or any springboard integrations need JMS, they must carefully evaluate the product. I would recommend Anypoint MQ only for MuleSoft customers. I won't recommend the solution to customers using a different integration platform because there's a cost associated with the product.
Overall, I rate Anypoint MQ an eight out of ten.
We use the solution for migration and integration.
There are issues with dead-letter queues.
I have been using Anypoint MQ for one year.
The product is stable so far.
The customer service is not good enough in Hong Kong.
We chose Anypoint MQ because it is a top-rated product in the market.
For the basic setup, we use some local message queues and integrate them with the message queue. It took one year to complete the setup.
We used another tool because it was complicated, and we had to hire a third party to build the architecture. The setup is quite complicated.
Anypoint MQ has stability issues. I have experienced data loss and inconsistent behaviour. The data isn't always pushed to the SQL database. When I put a message in the SQL queue, the data should be static, but it's not. Additionally, clicking a message in Anypoint MQ can sometimes trigger database loss. This instability becomes particularly noticeable when starting or restarting the server.
Overall, I rate the solution a four out of ten.
The solution is used as a middle environment as we have our own database settings and PostgreSQL database. If an API requires some information then they need to go through Mule Anypoint. We are also trying to implement our own DataGraph.
In our company, we have some other ETL tools but comparatively, MuleSoft is much more compatible in many other ways for data transformation. MuleSoft can handle a lot of different types of data. So even if something is not available, there are some workarounds, and this is professionally advantageous.
I have a lot of resources as a developer and I don't want to always ask Mule for help. There are a lot of online resources which can be referred to easily even as a beginner, which is a positive.
Most of the people who work here are long-term employees who are much more versatile in German, than English, and MuleSoft supports the local languages. That was one of the positives and was why Mulesoft was considered beyond its scalability and other functions. Whenever we need some support in our local language, we get it easily. They also have an office in Germany and if a person is unable to contact them by phone, they can go to the office in person.
The initial setup should be made easy and the documentation should have some guidance.
I have been using Mule Anypoint Platform for two years.
The solution's stability has increased over time.
It is a scalable solution. Presently, five to ten people use the solution.
The technical support team is quick with their responses and are prompt in providing a solution.
The initial setup is complex as there is no documentation that can guide you. There are professionals to help but they charge a lot.
I would recommend others to use the solution because it is easy to use. If they want to learn, there is a free course available on the website for developers. At the same time, even if you are not able to get some information readily available, there are a lot of other resources that are available online.
I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten as they are still improving.
We use Mule Anypoint Platform in our company for API integration, API orchestration, and other related things.
Mule Anypoint Platform's valuable features are its flexibility in terms of deployment and its SaaS capabilities. One of the solution's features is its connectors, which allow for any specific integrations within any other package software. Mule provides a lot of connectors for integration purposes.
I think Mule Anypoint Platform is one of the market leaders, so our customers prefer it, which is why I also use it.
The solution's user interface has shortcomings and can be made much better. Mule Anypoint Platform can be made more user-friendly so that people with lesser technical knowledge can understand the product. Mule Anypoint Platform can get too complex for non-technical people.
I have been working as a system integrator using Mule Anypoint Platform for two to three years.
It is a scalable solution.
My company caters to the needs of medium-sized businesses.
Mule's technical support is good. I rate the technical support between eight and nine out of ten.
Positive
Regarding Mule Anypoint Platform's installation, I can say that since we use the SaaS platform, we didn't face any issues with the installation of SaaS modules.
Mule Anypoint Platform is a SaaS system. The platform is available, so you just configure it and don't need to deploy anything. You just have to configure whether you want high availability, DR, or anything else. Otherwise, there is nothing much to deploy since it all falls on the SaaS capabilities.
We have only three engineers required for the configuration and adaptation of the product.
Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced.
The product's maintenance part is easy and requires only one person.
Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
