We performed a comparison between Mule Anypoint Platform and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business-to-Business Middleware solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It can scale."
"The platform's cloud integration capabilities are good."
"MuleSoft offers with the Anypoint Platform a unified platform for API management and an integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) as well as an on-premise Enterprise Service Bus pattern."
"The exchange and API management features are the best in the market."
"The most valuable feature of Mule Anypoint Platform is rapid development."
"Mule works very well with Salesforce and CRMs."
"MuleSoft Anypoint Platform's most valuable features are its observability and stability."
"Overall, it is a pretty good product. It is also very scalable."
"I like that the tool has all the adapters — all the possible protocols that are in the industry. You pay for those adapters but at least it's all in one package. You don't have to get another tool or application to support another partner."
"We can code in Java, which is really good feature. There is very vast command available, which can be used in mapping."
"The tool's performance doesn't get affected by transformation loads. You can write any number of rules, filtering criteria, transformations, etc."
"The solution's capabilities in fulfilling our existing B2B integration requirements are brilliant. Among our multiple customers we connect to SAP systems, JDE, all the various ERPs that you can possibly get, Oracle procurement systems, etc. We haven't come across anything yet — and customers are trying to trip us up — that we can't do."
"We haven't had any issues with scaling."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) also allowed us to connect EDI vendors at will."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"The stability is world-class. It is as good as any of the other options out there. They have addressed hiccups quickly, professionally, and with an excellent response."
"What I hear from my customers is that it's very expensive compared to the cost of other integration suites. The cost keeps increasing. MuleSoft should come up with customization factors by using a different way of getting the cost-related stuff to attract customers. That is, they should come up with some cost optimizations."
"It has different types of subscriptions. For platinum or lower subscriptions, there are not too many things that can be done. We don't see many features. They should release a basic version that has logging and monitoring features. These features should come with Mule Anypoint Platform for free instead of making customers pay separately for these features. Its dashboard can be improved to have a lot of charts so that it is easy to visualize information. The utilization part can be improved. The dashboard is good currently, but it can be better. Other solutions like Elastic have a good dashboard, and they allow you to administer the product from the UI. Currently, for RTF, there is a different dashboard or utility. It would be good to include the same utility in the cloud solution. It would be good if there is a centralized repository that includes the links to the information about various troubleshooting issues. The documentation is there currently, and it is good, but the troubleshooting information is too scattered. We have to go to different links to find troubleshooting information. This kind of centralized repository would be helpful for new customers who are implementing this solution. It will be helpful to see different kinds of issues that can occur."
"The price could be improved."
"The runtime management and connectors could use some work and are vulnerable to breakage after upgrades."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced...Mule Anypoint Platform can get too complex for non-technical people."
"The compatibility with vendors can be improved. Microsoft Azure heavily uses single software."
"The terms of use and how it's priced has become very difficult to manage, which is forcing us to look for alternatives already - and we haven't even been using it for that long just yet."
"It doesn't work well when you try using it for the processing layer."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"It's rather difficult to understand, from the application, what's broken and why it doesn't work. We typically need to get support from them directly, and it's usually in a consulting role, to fix issues."
"We wanted to use API. We were told that in 6.52 we could use API management. Later on, we found that API management wasn't that completely integrated into the 6.52 solution, and if you wanted to have the whole API suite you might have to go to 6.7, the latest one."
"In the BIS, if I want to have some API functionalities, that is a separate tool. The integration between the API tool and the BIS is not that straightforward. If they were to combine these tools and give us one suite, that would be helpful. Today I have a lot of partners onboard. I have something like 50,000 partners doing API transactions. If I want to introduce a new tool for API management, I have to do a lot of workarounds. But if it were integrated well within the existing suite, it could be straightforward for me."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
"The product is not integrated very well with different cloud providers. We did work with the vendor to build a solution for Amazon, but there is no solution for other cloud providers like Google or Azure. The vendor needs to create adapters so that if we have a requirement to transfer data from our data center to another cloud, outside of Amazon, we would be delighted with that."
"Some of the functionality for retriggering documents, where you have to step through a termination process and then retrigger it, versus just being able to restart or retrigger more easily, is a bit challenging, depending on the scenario."
"In some of the other tools out there in the market, you can create one service and use that service without creating a copy. That kind of capability currently doesn't exist in this solution."
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Mule Anypoint Platform is ranked 2nd in Business-to-Business Middleware with 41 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 5th in Business-to-Business Middleware with 37 reviews. Mule Anypoint Platform is rated 8.2, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Mule Anypoint Platform writes "Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". Mule Anypoint Platform is most compared with MuleSoft Composer, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, Oracle Integration Cloud Service, SAP Process Orchestration and SAP Cloud Platform, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and OpenText Trading Grid. See our Mule Anypoint Platform vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware vendors and best Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Business-to-Business Middleware 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.
