ESB Forum

Michael Sukachev
Lead Solutions Architect at a transportation company with 51-200 employees
Hello All, When I'm comparing the ROI for 3 years (licensing only) between Biztalk Server Enterprise Edition and Mule it looks like Biztalk is a good option I'm looking to find specific cons/pros on features, reliability and maintainability . Thanks.
Clóvis WichoskiI used and tested BizTalk, Oracle ESB, Mule and WSO2 Integrator, all these have advantages and suites well for SOA, the best answer will be based on your needs and how is your relation with the vendor and how much you wish to pay for that. The wish to run on cloud, on premises or hybrid, all that affects the ROI too. About Mule and BizTalk features all have the functions you need for a SOA platform, maybe the only way to calculate the better is how much time our team can do good things with each one, that must have more weight on your decision, is like buy the fastest car on the world, but dont know how to drive that car, then the better is one you know how to drive. In my own experience the winner when we talk about ROI is WSO2 Integrator, as is the only solution that only charges by support subscription, because license is Apache 2.0, and have many resources for a good SOA application.
fjb_saperYou should also not discard IIB (IBM ESB) from the picture. There are multiple versions that differ in licensing costs (depending on your needs). But it is one of the most portable. You might also want to look at the features and coordinate with your needs....
reviewer565644If you have dot net resources in house, Biztalk is definitely a better option. That being said, I believe java based technologies such as Mule, IBM and iWay are more suited to cases where there are heterogeneous environments. You may also want to look at the ability to connect to various sources, as a cheaper platform may not provide "future proofing"

Sign Up with Email