webMethods.io Reviews

The primary use of the webMethods platform is to communicate with multiple applications and integrate them. webMethods provides business process integration, B2B partner integration, and also uses Web services to connect software applications. My client acquired another company and we are integrating the partners of the acquired company with their clients, using various data communication standards like EDI, EDIFACT, and Rosettanet messages. 

In my previous project we used it to bridge communications between a front-end application and the back-end, connecting them with Web services through SOAP requests and SOAP responses, using JMS queues and broker.

When my organization wanted to migrate the front-end applications from a Genesys framework to .NET for various security reasons, webMethods was used for ESB integration. At the time of migration, there was no work being done on the ESB side, which reduced developers' efforts and all the services were re-used as we used Web services to connect the front-end with mainframes.

When my business client  acquired another business and we were integrating the services, as B2B uses standard communication messages, i.e. EDI, the work made the developers' task simpler, in handling all the interfaces.

All of the following three features provided by webMethods are valuable:

1. Application integration
2. Business process integration
3. B2B partner integration

But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed.

When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods.

On a scale of one to 10, I would rate this product an eight. I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well.

I have been using this solution for two years and four months and I haven't had any difficulty using it for building the interfaces and connecting various business processes, once I had acquired basic knowledge of the solution.

webMethods is primarily used to integrate applications. While one can always do the same by building APIs (Java, .NET, etc.), webMethods provides a robust, scalable, and easy to manage platform to do so.

The need is primarily felt when integrating multiple application for a large enterprise. To list a few, one can use webMethods to integrate web-based, file-based, database-based applications. Of course, this is just the tip of the iceberg. It has multiple modules for specific integration types, like a Trading Networks module for business to business integrations, business process models for graphical representations for executing business processes. One can also build small Web-based application using CAF and DSP.

Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API.

The second most important aspect is managing the components. It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console.

I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best with webMethods. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods. There have always been some ups and downs in its specialized modules, but I have found its core integration platform the most reliable.

The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that.

Primary use case is to provide ESB for legacy and SOA services, Business Process Management with BPMS and API Gateway for external partners.

We moved from EAI to SOA architecture while moving to webMethods. Both of these decisions made the reusable services approach available across the organization.

Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations.

The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

Average. No super-fast responses, no problems ultimately in resolving, and also no long, unresolved issues.

Complex, regarding previous architecture and full SOA stack deployment.

Microsoft BizTalk, JBoss SOA.

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.