We performed a comparison between OpenText MBPM and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Apache, Pega and others in Business Process Management (BPM)."Not just the solution's automation capabilities, but we like everything about it since we are more of a system integrator."
"High throughput and excellent scalability."
"webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators."
"How simple it is to create new solutions."
"The tool supports gRPC."
"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."
"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you."
"The user interface could be better in OpenText MBPM."
"There are shortcomings in the solution's support and documentation part."
"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"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."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"The product must add more compatible connectors."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText MBPM is ranked 41st in Business Process Management (BPM) with 2 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. OpenText MBPM is rated 7.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText MBPM writes " A solution offering good automation capabilities while needing to improve its support and documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". OpenText MBPM is most compared with Camunda, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi AtomSphere Integration.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.