WSO2 Enterprise Integrator Reviews

We primarily use the solution to access external services or expose our internal services to outside entities.

The solution basically conforms to our standards. 

It used to be or was available as open source. I'm not sure about this right now.

It is a stable product.

My understanding is the solution can scale. 

I don't know the whole history since I'm relatively new to the organization; however, the product that we use needs to be supported effectively. And for some time, we had paid for support, and yet we are not satisfied with the quality of service. Therefore, we just stopped using the service and the support, and now the product is being retired, as I understand.

One of the reasons that we are looking for a replacement is their way of defining integration. The language of the XML structures that I use to describe the integrations are not that standard, and it's not easy to find people who are familiar with this approach. Standardization of the programming on the configuration language would be an advantage.

I've been using the solution for over five years. 

We haven't had issues with stability in any way. There haven't been bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution has served our purposes, and we've never had issues in terms of scale. Therefore, I would assume scaling is fine.

We've found support, which we need to pay for, was generally lacking in the level of service we expected. It's a major contributor to why we are moving away from the product.

We are currently looking for a replacement for WSO2.

I was not present at the company when it was implemented. I can't speak to how easy or difficult the process was. 

Maintenace can be an issue sometimes as the support hasn't been great. With a lack of external support, we can run into issues. 

I'm not aware of the exact pricing. That was not in my scope of work.

We are using the most current update of the product.

I'd advise new users to evaluate the features of the product versus the requirements and to make sure that this is a good fit before committing to the product.

I'd rate the solution five out of ten, basically in the middle. I wasn't involved with the tool from the very beginning, and now we are moving away from it. I may not be the best source of information on the intricacies of the product itself. 

We use it to manage five of our vehicles. It's a data integration tool.

The productivity is the most valuable feature. It is very easy to write remediations. 

The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it.  

I have been using WSO2 for two to three years. 

The stability and scalability are normal. No issues with that. 

We have contacted their support and they were good but not perfect. 

The deployment took a few hours. 

It is possible to start with a free solution, and that's why it is a good starting point.

It is a good solution. It has many integration components. 

I would rate it a six out of ten. Not a ten because it's not so easy and it's a little difficult to deploy on a platform. It is difficult to build a high availability platform.

In the next release, it should be faster. 

Our primary use for this product is solution core integration. We recently used this for a project in the financial sector, where we were integrating different legacy systems and internal systems. This was a proof of concept project that has now been completed.

We have also used this solution for other elements, such as presenting management systems and as an API gateway host.

We are using the on-premise deployment model.

The learning curve for this solution is very good.

It is an open-source solution, so it is better in terms of cost.

We had some challenges with the installation of this solution. We were using the open-source version with no support, and I expect that if we had the paid version then this would have been fixed.

I would like to see better documentation for the open-source version. 

Considering the load we had at the time, which was low, it was stable.

We expect that better documentation would help when it comes to scaling this solution.

Currently, the volume is low, with less than one hundred users.

We did not have technical support, although we found that community support was good enough to fulfill our needs.

The initial setup of this solution was simple.

The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to start with a proof of concept project. That will allow them to properly scale it or benchmark it for their internal capacity.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for integration between core banking and other systems.

The solution provides a way to communicate with unknown software with standard flexibility. Normally, we did not have good service integration with multiple systems and it provided this functionality, which is good.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the integration between core banking and other systems.

There are a lot of security settings that when you apply you have to re-apply again every time you modify a setting. It is something that really needs to be enhanced.

The stability is excellent.

I wasn't able to check the scalability or test it very well previously, but I just tried it for about 1,000 transactions per minute, for testing, that it runs smoothly with no issue. We typically have a lower amount of transactions than that. Its use is not extensive.

We haven't used technical support.

We didn't previously use another solution. I was on the search for an open-source solution in order to have the ability to change or amend settings. 

The latest version remains very complex, although it's going to wizard. The information is very easy for handling the integration. The initial version we used had some complications but it's handled now. The deployment didn't take more than an hour. We only needed two people to implement the solution - an admin and a developer. For maintenance, we only need the admin.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

We don't use the cloud version; we have our own servers.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.