We performed a comparison between Bizagi and BizTalk Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Very user friendly and a professional solution."
"I like the ease of use and the fact that you can download and use their free version, which is unlimited. However, while it's unlimited use, some features aren't available."
"Your team can work on it having basic training about databases and BPM modeling."
"It is easy to use and easy to learn. It is also fully compatible with BPMN virtual tool. Bizagi is very fast in responding to and fixing the issues."
"The most valuable feature is the organizational modeling capability."
"The user interface is pretty good."
"The product has a comfortable GUI and a good environment for users."
"The product allowed users to connect with flow chart elements with ease."
"I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good."
"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."
"BIzTalk's integration with Visual Studio is the most valuable feature of this product."
"Essentially, you can do whatever you like with these systems, and you do not have to take care about the scaling because if one server is overloaded, it just forwards the message to the next server, even if it were designated to a specific server. It weeds out the messages according to the load. If you want to scale it, you just add new servers."
"Framework approach, which extends to reusability in tools, like Pega, for deployment management could be improved."
"Cloud support for their process mapping tool could be better. To map all your processes in any way and call your data, you need to download their on-premise setup or their desktop setup. Cloud support for process mapping is limited, and they should work on that."
"The solution was very limited."
"Also, the tool sometimes feels not so mature when we find random deploy errors from testing to production environment."
"The on-premise software has some bugs."
"The open source version lacks the option to publish."
"It needs an easier setup for the Bizagi Engine."
"The gateway through which it connects with other vendors, specifically RPA vendors, is one aspect that could be improved."
"The product's deployment can be quicker"
"BizTalk is in the past, Microsoft is not going to evolve it any further or add any new features."
"It's a complex product because you have many degrees of freedom to connect different parts together. Whether it's sensible or not, is up to you, but the machine does allow it. But because of the vast degrees of freedom, it's complex."
"BizTalk Server is an outdated legacy system that does not support messaging."
"The deployment could be simplified."
Bizagi is ranked 7th in Process Automation with 78 reviews while BizTalk Server is ranked 25th in Process Automation with 9 reviews. Bizagi is rated 8.4, while BizTalk Server is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Bizagi writes "A flexible, customizable solution that reduced time to market, but the UI and customer support could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BizTalk Server writes "Helps us implement complex mapping and integration, but deployment could be simplified". Bizagi is most compared with Camunda, Visio, Bonita, Microsoft Power Apps and ARIS BPA, whereas BizTalk Server is most compared with IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, SAP Process Orchestration, Camunda, SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite and Oracle Data Integrator (ODI). See our BizTalk Server vs. Bizagi report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.
