We performed a comparison between Oracle Integration Cloud Service and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The dashboard provided by Oracle Integration Cloud for monitoring and error handling is very intuitive."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of customization."
"It's easy to build an integration and make changes to it."
"The most important part would be the use of connectors. The significant number of cloud connectors available for active integration is its value."
"It's very easy to get started on the solution. It's also easy to maintain, scale, and integrate according to cost factors."
"The most valuable features of Oracle Integration Cloud Service are the seeded integrations with many communication platforms, such as Slack and emails. It works best for the historical communication methods. Those are still prevalent with all the other clients. When we are doing the integrations, it makes it a little bit easier for us to communicate the same output over Slack, rather than sending out an email and downloading the report. The number of seeded functionalities within the Oracle Integration Cloud Service platform is better."
"People are able to scale up, learn it quickly, and start delivering."
"The Oracle integration tool is the most comfortable tool for using those Oracle products."
"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."
"One valuable feature is the scalability. We have not had to add processing power or hardware since we installed it. Also, we are able to create and deploy maps to migrate from another EDI platform very quickly."
"Among the most valuable features are the EDI translator and a lot of the components which enable creating compliance sets. Having something standard out-of-the-box and being able to use that has been a huge benefit for us."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) has been good at communicating between two applications, changing formats and using the required protocols... We can have one site communicating in an old FTP or SFTP style, or via file transfer. And with other applications, we could have API or a web service call or some other protocol used to send information."
"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."
"We can use it to script and monitor processes."
"Oracle-based automation blueprints for the majority of the integrations would be helpful to have in a future release."
"Oracle Integration Cloud Service can improve the downloading and uploading of files. I've submitted this issue to the Oracle Idea Labs. The issue is from the front end of Oracle Integration Cloud, we cannot download or upload a file directly or drag and drop it."
"While most of the adapters are available through Oracle Integration Cloud Services, they do not have a lot of features. I would like to see some enrichment in this area and for the solution to go deeper into the applications and upgrade the adapters."
"The support and resources were lacking — they weren't there."
"It has lengthy documentation, making the process of building applications more time-consuming."
"We would love to have more and more ready-to-use interfaces from Oracle."
"Oracle Integration Cloud Service can improve file handling. Currently, our real-time file polling limitation is 10 MB, if that size can be increased it would be helpful. For example, increasing the size from 10 MB to 1 GB."
"Sometimes, the tech support is slow to get back to us. We have had to wait up to two weeks for a response."
"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."
"I would've liked, from day one, to learn how to do my own mapping. That would have saved a lot of time and effort if that had been brought forward earlier. It's there, I just didn't know about it. Also, some tidier, easier-to-use interfaces would help."
"I don't think the scalability of the solution is that great because they have tied the solution to their named nodes and it does not allow scalability like some of the cloud products allow."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"Their traditional model is a vendor flow. We are looking to do a customer-based flow, which which require significant development from SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). We are working with them to do this using their WebEDI. It is a brand new area for them, but it could be an option in the future."
More Oracle Integration Cloud Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle Integration Cloud Service is ranked 3rd in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) with 32 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 11th in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) with 37 reviews. Oracle Integration Cloud Service is rated 8.0, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Oracle Integration Cloud Service writes "An integration tool that is highly compatible and easy to maintain". 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". Oracle Integration Cloud Service is most compared with Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), AWS Glue, Mule Anypoint Platform, Oracle GoldenGate and Azure Data Factory, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and Microsoft Azure API Management. See our Oracle Integration Cloud Service vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) 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.
