We performed a comparison between BizTalk Server 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."We can handle a large number of messages without any issues, ensuring that everything runs smoothly."
"I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good."
"BIzTalk's integration with Visual Studio is the most valuable feature of this product."
"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."
"Compared to the current solutions I use, like Azure Logic Apps and other cloud services, BizTalk was far better and more reliable."
"For the tool that we used to have, we had specially trained developers who used to do all the development of EDI maps and the configuration. But with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) now, we were able to train our EDI analysts, and because the tool has very simple, intuitive mapping capabilities, even our EDI analysts are able to develop all the EDI maps, do all the configurations, and do all the setups for any of the trading partners."
"It's a very robust solution and it's very configurable. Before this product we would use an ESB-type of solution which required us to write code and go through a process. We can configure the SEEBURGER solution much more easily, instead of writing code... It can handle large files very well."
"We rarely get hanged processes."
"Among the most important [features] are the BIC 6 Converter and the communication protocols, which have the newer security features for certificates and encryption."
"Mapping Designer provides excellent flexibility."
"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."
"If SEEBURGER plans to do something, they will meet their target. We haven't been disappointed by them at all. For example, we had six trading partners to onboard and they said, "We'll make it happen," and they did make it happen. They did exactly what they said they would do. That's a really positive thing."
"In our landscape, we have a lot of AS/400s or iSeries and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) has a file service listener that allows data to seamlessly be transferred between the SEEBURGER solution and the AS/400."
"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."
"The deployment could be simplified."
"The product's deployment can be quicker"
"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."
"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 product could be improved in monitoring, managing, and support functionalities."
"BizTalk is in the past, Microsoft is not going to evolve it any further or add any new features."
"BizTalk Server is an outdated legacy system that does not support messaging."
"I would like there to be a feature that could handle the limited server."
"A true debugger that allows you to step through the process would be a good improvement. Right now, we are limited to reading the log file generated by the test screen in Mapping Designer."
"They have their own private cloud. That's the reason we did not go ahead with managing everything by ourselves or moving into the cloud. They said that they're going to be doing it within the next two years, having access to Azure and AWS. That would be something we would like to see."
"On the server side, there are a lot of administration and configuration files that you need to go in and do maintenance on. You have to find them in a certain folder so it's very error-prone and it can be a little time consuming unless it's documented. They could pull some of those individual configuration files into the product itself where there's a better user interface for 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."
"They made improvements to the email error alerts that go out, for the EDI technical. Those typically go straight out to the partners. Those messages are significantly clearer and easy to read. The same messages in the front end are not nearly as clear. It's supposed to be the same error, but the message that goes out for EDI is really easy for anybody to read and understand, but you have to be really solution-savvy to understand the message in the system itself."
"The initial setup is not the straightforward. It took couple of months for us to set up."
"The integration is not so excellent. While I'm not saying there is a problem, there is no pattern. When we start a new project, we have to work with new people and processes every time. The technical side of their system is very good, but their change process is not repeatable. It needs to be rebuilt each time."
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
BizTalk Server is ranked 6th in Business-to-Business Middleware with 12 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 5th in Business-to-Business Middleware with 37 reviews. BizTalk Server is rated 7.4, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. 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 SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". BizTalk Server is most compared with IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, SAP Process Orchestration, Camunda, Microsoft System Center Orchestrator and Bizagi, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and SAP Process Orchestration. See our BizTalk Server vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware 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.