Compare Appian vs. webMethods Integration Server

Appian is ranked 6th in Business Process Management with 11 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 5th in Business Process Management with 13 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "We are creating workflows in an agile manner". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Integration Server and Universal messaging create an efficient development phase, enhance agility". Appian is most compared with Pega BPM, ServiceNow and Camunda BPM, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus and Oracle Service Bus. See our Appian vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. webMethods Integration Server and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
377,828 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
Form building capabilities and well thought out process modelling are key points to this product.The process models provide self-documenting systems.Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed.Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored.Another advantage of this tool is its reports and records. You can maintain dashboards, layouts. If you with a Java solution, it takes six months time. If you use this tool, you can finish in one or one and a half months' time.There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements.Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus.Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files.

Read more »

A product with good API and EDI components.We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting.It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine).We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces.The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging.The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed.I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well.

Read more »

Cons
Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built.My only request is that they decrease the license costs.We would like to have more granular control for interface styling.The documentation needs to be improved.Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases.A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose.The reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards.It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem.

Read more »

The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly.We need more dashboards and reporting engines that can provide detailed information for management. In short, we need better analytics.t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData.We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable.Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion.When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods.The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that.The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The cost depends on the number of users, although I recommend taking an unlimited license.It's good value for the price.I think that if somebody is really serious at looking at business value, then by all means, the product is well worth the value. You get representative business value for the price that you pay for the product, and for the implementation of the product.Product pricing compared to some of the earlier vendors, like IBM, CA, and Oracle, is quite well-priced. Although, we do feel that as we increase the number of users and the workload increases, we will have to spend more.We will have to have a dialogue or negotiate a price for future use. To start with, it is a reasonable price. As we go ahead, we will have to make sure the costs are inline with our expectations as we grow our user base and workloads.

Read more »

It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one.Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers.Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Management solutions are best for your needs.
377,828 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
10,980
Comparisons
7,654
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
473
Avg. Rating
8.5
Views
15,099
Comparisons
10,475
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
309
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Also Known As
Appian BPM, Appian AnyWhere, Appian Enterprise BPMS
Learn
Appian
Software AG
Overview
With Appian, your organization can rapidly build, deploy, use, and scale problem-solving apps. And with the flexibility of on-premises and cloud portability, you'll always address your unique challenges the way that makes the most sense for you.

The award-winning webMethods Integration Server, our Enterprise Service Bus (ESB), is a complete enterprise application integration solution. It's standards-based so it "speaks" any technology. You can integrate any technology from any vendor: ERP systems, databases, mainframes and legacy apps. SaaS platforms, Web services, JMS messaging systems and packaged apps.

Offer
Learn more about Appian
Learn more about webMethods Integration Server
Sample Customers
Hansard Global plc, Punch Taverns, Pirelli, Crawford & Company, EDP Renewables, Queensland Government Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (, Bank of TennesseeFujitsu, Coca Cola, ING, Credit Suisse, Electrolux, GTA, CosmosDirekt
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm50%
University13%
Transportation Company13%
Software R&D Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company24%
Financial Services Firm18%
Comms Service Provider7%
Transportation Company6%
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company22%
Pharma/Biotech Company11%
Maritime Company11%
Logistics Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company35%
Financial Services Firm8%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
Comms Service Provider7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise53%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise72%
REVIEWERS
Small Business17%
Large Enterprise83%
Find out what your peers are saying about Appian vs. webMethods Integration Server and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
377,828 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Business Process Management 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.
Sign Up with Email