FME Reviews

The use cases for FME are mainly integration to the GE Smallworld product. GE Smallworld is a GE product, and we are using it to integrate with other third-party products into GE Smallworld and ADMS systems.

The feature regarding automation capacity for scheduling data processing tasks is mainly used by one of our customers, Vodacom, and they are doing the automated exchange. That is very useful for them. It's only one of my customers that's using it. That's their business requirement to do real-time data exchange.

From my reseller perspective, the best features in FME are the ease of operation and the fact that it works. They are developing the necessary plugins to third-party products, so it's easy to use and very well-developed and usable.

The extensive format support, which covers over 400 file formats in the product, is essentially one of the reasons why we are using it.

Regarding the advanced spatial data capabilities, I don't know the technical details directly, as I'm more on the sales side. FME manages large volumes of spatial data in sectors such as GIS and environmental analysis effectively. It performs well and doesn't have issues in managing big loads of data.

I haven't had any input or requirements from any customers that are not currently covered, so I don't have any additional needs that were identified or raised to me.

Regarding pricing, with the model changes that they've implemented a while back, it actually made it more expensive to use, especially on the server side. They changed the licensing model, and that made customers think it is overpriced. Some customers were actually looking at alternatives. Pricing with the model changes was perceived negatively.

I work primarily with enterprise customers, Vodacom, Eskom, so it's tier-one customers. For small customers, this solution is a bit too expensive. They don't really use it and just do direct integration on smaller implementations. This is basically used by tier-one customers.

FME is still able to save time and money for clients. It's still a good investment.

Regarding similar products to FME, GE developed a product called Data Fabric. That is a real-time operational integration platform, Data Fabric Network Connect, which is a GE Grid OS product. It is actually more expensive than FME, but the purpose is different as it's operational. The vendor in this case is GE, and it's a company that we bought that used to be called Greenbird. In current use scenarios, FME is still leading compared to Data Fabric. The GE product has a different application.

I have been reselling FME for more than 10 years. It's a very long time.

I'm not aware of any glitches or stability issues that customers are experiencing, so I would say FME is fairly stable.

Even though it is on-premises, the solution is for the specific purpose that they are using it, so they don't really scale up or down quite often. In the cases where it's used, it is not an issue. If it were hosted with a different pricing model where you can quickly scale up and down, it might have different requirements. In the case where we use it, it will not necessarily make a huge difference.

I'm happy with the technical support from Safe Software for FME.

I use two versions currently. The latest version that's just come out and the 2022 versions.

Currently, I'm using the solution to pull APC data using the data collection. I've got to transform the data massively to make it usable, so I use FME for huge amounts of transformation and to put it into ArcGIS Enterprise. FME is a ZTL as well, specifically the "L" bit. I also use FME for a lot of analysis where we want it quick and efficient on big datasets that ArcGIS Pro is unrealistic to do on.

I also use FME, where if somebody sends me a spreadsheet where, for example, we would need to get everything in capital letters, it's quicker for me to capitalize everything in FME Workbench than it is in Excel.

I can use FME for just about everything, from logging processes to looking at file structures, what's changed in file structures, what people are doing, or what they've updated. It's not just need-to-know. It's a massive piece of software that's also coded in Python. What FME can't do, I then write in Python.

I can make FME pull in ArcPy, which means that for every single thing that ArcGIS Pro can do, I can make FME. It's much bigger than the box.

When I do coding, I think about every single function. Some of these functions can be very elementary, like doing a substring or some capitalization. But FME removes all that coding because it's a transformer, so the time to develop an application to get to a point where you're producing results is decreased massively. It used to take weeks and months to develop software, and now I can use something like FME, and within one day, we get results. We can look at and validate data. We make minor subtle changes to the workbenches to improve it. We can share the workbenches. We don't have to use GitHub or anything else.

The one thing that always appears in the community is the ability to make really easy loops to loop through data efficiently. That needs to be added at some point. There must be a technical or commercial reason why it has not been done in FME yet, but many people ask for it, and it just doesn't appear. We can do it, but we have to create a child workbench to do it.

I've used FME for more than five years.

I've used the 2022 and 2023 versions because of the application's stability, not the tools. What FME has done is they've bought out 2023 and update the backend code for the interface, and it's crap. The update was more about making the presentation pretty, similar to what they did with Office or ArcMap to ArcGIS Pro. I use 2022 when I want the interface to remain stable over a long period and 2023 when I want to see the updates and see if anything could have been changed.

The stability with the 2022 version is really good, and I rate it an eight out of ten. The stability with the 2023 version is probably a five out of ten. The stability depends on the version used.

FME's scalability is fantastic. I rate it a ten out of ten. It's one of the most useful pieces of software I've ever encountered in my entire life.

More than ten users use it in my organization.

FME workbench is dead easy to set up. It cannot be easier. Double-click on something and go, "Next, next, next." And then it's done.

Licensing is so straightforward if you've got a trial license or pay for it. You just type it in, and it authenticates on the server.

FME server, on the other hand, comes in two types: FME Cloud, with FME server inside, or FME server, which is on-premises. They are straightforward, provided you've got an IT department to set up the servers correctly in the first place.

FME Workbench took three minutes to deploy. FME server took a morning. FME Cloud is all automated. We just need to sign up, type in our details, and add a credit card, and It builds the server for us. The whole process takes under one hour.

We have seen an ROI, but it doesn't justify the price.

The pricing is really bad. Last year, they rebranded the whole pricing structure. It used to be moderately priced at about £400 per user per year. Now they've changed the whole thing, and it's expensive, at ten times the price. The pricing is based on your company size, turnover, and all these different things to do with the company.

I had a conversation in London. I spoke to an FME guy from Canada at a conference and said it was horrendous. FME Server used to cost £10,000; now it can cost over £100,000. It's worth the money, but the rebrand is just killing them.

I rate FME a seven out of ten because of the price.

The number of types of data you can save and read is growing massively. Similarly, the solution is improving at working with APIs, downloading data from remote sources much more efficiently. There are more transformers, but these are aimed at data types that don't apply to me.

Before choosing FME, immediately look into licensing and costs before you go down the road of trials and becoming dependent on the trial. When you finish that trial, you'll find yourself semi-dependent on software. Get the costs first because it's a shock.

Primary use cases include: creating automatic data flow processes, enabling users to self-serve their data needs, and handling real-time events. It is a fault-tolerant, scalable multi-tier solution, so it has backup facilities. One can use a multi-server setup with a database. We can download data, start processes, update databases, send messages, tweets, push notifications, and almost everything in a few clicks. With spatial data, it has almost no competitors.

FME handles all ETL processes, refreshes data, and produces reports and dashboards. 

Automated data enrichment and analysis using the setups we use are great for just doing the jobs by hand. 

We easily share data and workspaces among users in a secure setup with managed authorizations, connected to Active Directory. 

There is even a hosted solution, where one does not have to worry about having the appropriate server environment. All that is required is selecting a platform version, data storage region, performance type, and need for data space and ignite!

All spatial features are unrivaled, and the possibility to execute them based on a scheduled trigger, manual, e-mail, Websocket, tweet, file/directory change or virtually any trigger is most valuable. 

The integration between FME Flow and FME Form is super as is its integration with scripting like Python is superb. 

It is a really intuitive product; just type anything in the canvas and methods for processing pop up. Data is processed intelligently, though for optimal dataflow some human thinking has to be done. 

Improvements could be made to mapping presentations. Though there are functions available for this, it is a complex and broad area that is not covered to the fullest extent. There is a presentation module, however, it is in no way a real GIS. 

For now, there is the FME Forms product to enter detailed data mapping setups, which is a great tool. However, having an online medium for this would be great. In a future version, it would be great to have a website where you can log in and create your workspace to do the detailed data processing and publish it to the FME Flow environment where it can be used to participate in the general data processing setups.

I've been using FME Flow, a.k.a. FME Server, now for 15 years. 

I never got a blue page, however, that might be on my side.

Performance is where you put the computational power. Do not drag large datasets over the internet if you just need the total number of addresses in a country.  

I did some work with Azure Functions, Databricks, and AWS Web Services. It is just for historical and pricing reasons that I did not switch to AWS or Azure platforms. 

FME is the nicer and cheaper platform that supports all the functions of larger platforms. 

I did not evaluate other options. I rolled in and fell in love with the platform.

FME is used to transfer GIS data from either on-premise into the cloud or between the primary servers and disaster recovery. We use it in various different ways.

FME is spatially aware and understands how to deal with the conversion of spatial objects and their attributes. It is a well-established product for handling geospatial data, transfer, and ETL processes. It helps automate workflows for GIS customers, making it a standard in the industry.

I have used the solution for years.

In my experience, FME handles the largest datasets we work with. I have never heard anyone comment that they had to break it up into pieces, indicating that it is scalable.

I have not directly dealt with Safe Software's customer service or technical support. However, I have heard of no problems with their support.

Positive

We have always used FME. We did not switch from anything.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We are looking at the possibility of using Glue instead of FME, using the native AWS product.

The overall rating for FME is eight out of ten, and I prefer the feedback to be anonymous. My job title is Senior Solutions Architect.

We use FME in geographical data analysis where a lot of sources or processes are involved.

The most valuable feature of FME is the graphical user interface. There is nothing better. It is very easy to debug because you can see all steps where there are failures. Overall the software is easy to optimize a process. 

There's a map in the graphical user interface that helps in assessing whether you are processing data correctly in the geographical transformations.

FME can improve the geographical transformation. I've had some problems with the geographical transformations, but it's probably mostly because I'm not the most skilled geographer in-house. The solution requires some in-depth knowledge to perform some functions.

In the next release, it would be useful to have recommendations on how and how not to use the different functions. It would be helpful because this is a tool we only use once in a while and you have to wrap your mind around this tool quickly it can be difficult.

I have been using FME for proximately two years.

FME is a highly stable solution.

We are using FME for batch processes. We have not fully tested the capabilities, but for our usage, it has scaled well.

The support from FME was very good. The support we received was personalized.

I rate the support from FME a five out of five.

Positive

I have used ArcGIS Pro and FME is a bit easier to use. ArcGIS Pro takes a lot more experience and expertise to use and we still use it for more complex data processing tasks.

The initial setup of FME is not for beginners. The installation of the license server locally can be a challenge. However, fortunately, it's very similar to the on-premise installation of license servers from ArcGIS Pro which we have used.

The full process of implementing FME took a couple of days because we had to involve the national IT unit.

I rate the initial setup of FME a five out of ten.

FME can be managed by one person. I was an IT manager handling the maintenance in my company.

We used the standard licensing for our use of FME. The cost was approximately €15,000 annually. We always welcome less expensive solutions, if the solution could be less expensive it would be helpful.

I would recommend the desktop version of FME. The company is trying to sell it as a server version with automatically processing capabilities, but it's only buying one shared license for batch processing purposes. That's cost-effective. I don't think we will be able to raise the money for a desktop version. The data we are using it for would have to be very important.

I rate FME a nine out of ten.

We use FME to manage network infrastructure for Smallworld Database.

FME integrates well with various systems. It has standard plug-ins available for different data sources.

FME's price needs improvement for the African market.

We have been using FME for ten years.

The product is stable.

It is a scalable platform and suitable for enterprise businesses.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

The platform is fast and easy to install. It takes less than two hours to complete the process. If you have a license for annual support for maintenance, you receive updates and patches. One executive is required to maintain it.

The product's price is reasonable. As resellers, we get discounts. It helps us adjust the cost as per the customer's requirements. Additionally, it is an outright purchase with annual maintenance and support services.

It is a good product to use. It is well-used in the industry. I rate it a ten out of ten.

We use FME to do some ad hoc analysis, especially facial analysis, but they use it as well to do some generic processing for data quality controls. These are the main use purposes. It's in a governmental context and the most important data sets or addresses link to other information. Also authentication on partials.

FME's features that I have found most valuable are that it has a very friendly user interface. You don't need to use a lot of code. For us, that's the most important aspect of it. Also, it has a lot of connectors and few forms. It has a strong facial aspect. It can do a lot of facial analysis.

The price is a bit high in comparison with other tools. But maybe it's justified because it has a lot of possibilities.

I have been using FME for three years. Other colleagues from our organization use it as well so there is a lot of expertise with this tool.

We think FME is very stable. We don't have a lot of issues with it even after upgrades.

In terms of scalability, we now have one engine we use to execute all the jobs. But it is going to its limits and we think we would need another extra engine to complete our scheduled processing. 

We have about three users that are using the desktop. But the whole organization benefits from the output. 

We will keep using it. We will have a look at the scalability. We are looking to other integration tools as well because we want to go a bit further and establish a data warehouse.

We get our technical support from a Belgian service. The technical support is good.

The initial setup was a long time ago but I don't remember any issues or problems, so I think it was a good installation.

We have three fixed licenses. I think it would be more interesting to look at the floating licenses, because we do not use the licenses simultaneously. That's something we want to do in the near feature.

FME is a great tool, but I don't know if we can scale it up since the prices are high and we would need to convince the decision makers to provide more budget.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give FME an eight.

To get a higher rating, it would have to improve the price and the associated scalability. These are the main issues.