We performed a comparison between Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is simple for encrypting data transfer of all the assets in our system."
"AMPLIFY has all the essential features for managing file transfer."
"It is an easy-to-use and stable product."
"It makes a logical link between the inbound/outbound transfer, and makes it clearly visible. This is a very important feature for managing transfer with different environments, and it's very helpful in case of troubleshooting."
"It’s very flexible."
"Axway consolidated all of our communications into one platform, simplifying network and port management. Now, all we have to do is open one port to this application, and we can remove all the firewall rules on that port. It's much more straightforward to manage from a security perspective. We used to rely on an archaic FTP solution, but Axway features SFTP, so it was an improvement security-wise."
"Among the most important [features] are the BIC 6 Converter and the communication protocols, which have the newer security features for certificates and encryption."
"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."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a highly stable solution that offers rich features for our B2B integration."
"The ease of integration of the SEEBURGER product into SAP was pretty seamless. There wasn't any trouble, there weren't any complexities."
"We had a requirement for transferring data to Amazon S3 buckets but we did not have a solution in our shop for large data transfers to Amazon S3. We worked with SEEBURGER and created a framework solution and now, using that solution, we can configure the transfer in an hour or two and enable it to go to existing or new S3 buckets."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"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 use Message Tracking, which is a very good feature. Message Tracking has about 300 to 400 business people who can find documents and ask the integration team about them. For example, they looking for a document that the vendor or trading partner tells them that they sent, but they don't see it in the ERP system yet. So, they go to SEEBURGER Message Tracking, which can tell them if we received it already from the outside and what happened, e.g., if it went to SEEBURGER BIS or if it's already in the ERP system. It's a very simple tool to use. They also can use that tool to see the source document."
"The initial setup was quite complex."
"It is complicated to manage multi-operations, particularly in handling file name changes within file transcripts."
"The areas in need of improvement are the monitoring and the cut-off management, when needed. Today you have at least two solutions: Buy the other Axway suite, Sentinel, or integrate it into your monitoring system."
"We only hope that they continue to keep updating the solution and improving the offering. They could always do more updates and releases."
"Sometimes, the application's embedded databases couldn't perform well for a higher volume of data."
"Improvement in Data Encoding would be very appreciated (I'm thinking of ASCII-EBCDIC, ASCII-ASCII, etc.)."
"One area of improvement is troubleshooting. When a transfer fails, they provide little information about the login, which makes troubleshooting difficult. Also, file transfer scheduling is primitive. By that, I mean you can't define a complex schedule, like scheduling a job to run at particular hours multiple times in a day."
"The BIS Front End needs a little bit of refreshing, especially when it comes to setting up new trading partners and trading partner agreements or transactions. It can be a bit clumsy to copy and rename and then go in and modify."
"The speed of development needs improvement. If you acquire any customization, it can be a slightly slow process. I would like to see more flexibility around customizations. The time frame right now depends on the sophistication and customization, but we have to go through a process of getting them to develop, implement, and test it. This might take a couple of weeks. If it was a simpler system to customize, the time could probably be cut by half or down by even 25 percent of what it would normally take."
"When we got SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), it was clear that it was going to take more of a technical person. It does take a technically-rooted individual to operate it. It's not something for your everyday guy to do. For what it's doing for us, a dedicated resource is required."
"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 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."
"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."
"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."
"There are some aspects at the front, the actual queries that you use, that could be improved. They're all very minor to be honest."
More Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is ranked 11th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 7 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 14th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 37 reviews. Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is rated 7.8, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer writes "Secure application with efficient features for file transfer management ". 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". Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, 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 Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.