We performed a comparison between BizTalk Server and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is its reliability and stability. The first version of BizTalk was released in 2000, and many companies still use it. It was stable until 2013 when we had support."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good."
"Compared to the current solutions I use, like Azure Logic Apps and other cloud services, BizTalk was far better and more reliable."
"Essentially, you can do whatever you like with these systems, and you do not have to take care about the scaling because if one server is overloaded, it just forwards the message to the next server, even if it were designated to a specific server. It weeds out the messages according to the load. If you want to scale it, you just add new servers."
"We can handle a large number of messages without any issues, ensuring that everything runs smoothly."
"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."
"BIzTalk's integration with Visual Studio is the most valuable feature of this product."
"I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten."
"It can manage multiple servers and workstations from a single location."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"It's an on-premises system, requiring physical servers for deployment. This is different from Azure; you don't need any servers with Azure. If you have a subscription, you can do whatever you want. There are unit restrictions based on the environment (like non-production vs. production) in BizTalk. You need physical servers and databases. In Azure, those are not required – it's all in the cloud."
"The deployment could be simplified."
"The product could be improved in monitoring, managing, and support functionalities."
"The product's deployment can be quicker"
"BizTalk Server is an outdated legacy system that does not support messaging."
"It's a complex product because you have many degrees of freedom to connect different parts together. Whether it's sensible or not, is up to you, but the machine does allow it. But because of the vast degrees of freedom, it's complex."
"BizTalk lacks native cloud support. BizTalk doesn't offer in-built support for cloud. We need to use third-party adapters to connect it to cloud services."
"BizTalk is in the past, Microsoft is not going to evolve it any further or add any new features."
"I find the Orchestrator UI to be problematic."
"The product's management aspect needs enhancement."
More Microsoft System Center Orchestrator Pricing and Cost Advice →
BizTalk Server is ranked 17th in Process Automation with 12 reviews while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is ranked 21st in Process Automation with 2 reviews. BizTalk Server is rated 7.4, while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BizTalk Server writes "For production environments, messages are easily stored within the MessageBox database and offers multiple deployment methods ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft System Center Orchestrator writes "Automates tasks and manages multiple servers from a central location ". BizTalk Server is most compared with IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, SAP Process Orchestration, Camunda and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, whereas Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is most compared with Camunda, Ivanti Automation, OpenText Operations Orchestration and ServiceNow Orchestration. See our BizTalk Server vs. Microsoft System Center Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
