We performed a comparison between Informatica PowerCenter and SAP Process Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the dynamic reading of the file metadata profile, and the ability to define business rules that are used to verify and validate the uploaded files."
"It is UI friendly and has all the advantages of an ETL tool."
"The most complex task, in this case, was to read and transform BLOB data, and Java transformation in Informatica Power Center was a great solution."
"The technical support is excellent."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"To me, what's most valuable in Informatica PowerCenter is the flexibility in building the integration pipeline. Usually, you need to have a platform to be able to integrate with different technologies, including legacy data such as the mainframe. The platform should also be rich enough to transform the data per your business requirement, with no restrictions. Rich integration and rich transformation capabilities are the two key capabilities in Informatica PowerCenter. The solution also offers ease of use. Another valuable feature of Informatica PowerCenter is the drag-and-drop integration because it's GUI-based, similar to IBM and Oracle."
"The technical support for Informatica PowerCenter is good."
"The partitioning and optimization to help enhance our development is a very valuable aspect of Informatica PowerCenter."
"It is simple to transfer files."
"The main benefit is that the solution is low maintenance. Moreover, it's the license cost is very low because it's part of the package. The maintenance is standard maintenance. And the updates are regular. So there's a regular update and you can choose whether you want to do those updates or not."
"It is strategically focused to forecast a global integration platform for our business."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The standard adapter with EBA abilities is the most valuable feature. It has good process integration."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Process Orchestration fulfils the need for middleware to mediate types of connectivity."
"The initial setup is not straightforward. You need expertise to do it."
"PowerCenter could integrate better with cloud applications. We had to do a lot of configuration work using API integrations to connect with cloud applications. Informatica Cloud Data Integration has a generic connector that you can use directly, so it's much easier."
"Areas for improvement in Informatica PowerCenter include scalability and high availability or the clustering configuration because that's still very basic. The elasticity or scaling of the platform needs a lot of improvement. For example, when it comes to DR handling or building an active-active or active-passive cluster, Informatica PowerCenter is still not that powerful. Automation also needs improvement in the solution. Improving automation leads to some improvement in the stability of Informatica PowerCenter and other aspects related to it. What I'd like to see in the next release of Informatica PowerCenter is real-time capability because the solution is mainly for patches, and to have real-time integration, you need to count on some additional components from Informatica. I would expect more integration and a complete platform in terms of real-time capability or patching with minimal interventions or minimal components to be aligned together."
"It would be nice to have all tools in one place. CDC needs more effort, as it's only easy to develop if you are familiar with Linux."
"The solution can improve by providing more connectivity by having native ODBC or JDBC connections available. It will be easier and more people could start using it."
"Include more instruments for LOGs analysis, interpretation, and job corrections."
"Support could be better."
"The documentation could be improved."
"Process Orchestration doesn't provide authentication for data sent to us, meaning we have to rely on client certificate-based or basic authentication."
"It requires some maintenance."
"The older version of the solution will no longer be supported."
"The product roadmap suggests it will approach the end of support in several years, and a lot of innovations are now implemented by SAP not in SAP PO, but in SAP Integration Suite, hence, the platform is stable, but doesn't receive a lot of new features in recent updates."
"SAP Process Orchestration breaks down sometimes."
"The responsiveness of technical support needs to be improved."
"The usability is an area where it can be improved upon."
"I feel that support is an area that needs improvement. They need to improve the response time and address the customer's issues as soon as possible."
Informatica PowerCenter is ranked 3rd in Data Integration with 78 reviews while SAP Process Orchestration is ranked 1st in Business-to-Business Middleware with 28 reviews. Informatica PowerCenter is rated 8.0, while SAP Process Orchestration is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Informatica PowerCenter writes "Stable, provides good support, and integrating it with other systems is very fast, but its pricing is expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Process Orchestration writes "A tool that can be useful for small integrations and large integrations". Informatica PowerCenter is most compared with Informatica Cloud Data Integration, Azure Data Factory, SSIS, Databricks and AWS Glue, whereas SAP Process Orchestration is most compared with Mule Anypoint Platform, SAP Data Services, webMethods Integration Server, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services and Boomi iPaaS. See our Informatica PowerCenter vs. SAP Process Orchestration report.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.