We performed a comparison between BMC Control-M 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 most valuable features of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer are the ease of use and the ability to watch the files as they transfer called Watch File Transfer. There is a separate monitoring window that is useful."
"The scalability of this solution is very good. The current solution is used wide spread in my company, but I don't have any plans to expand."
"I am a partner and an implementer for Control-M. Once purchased by my clients, I implement this solution and provide daily support for this scheduling tool."
"Dashboard and recovery are the features I found most valuable in the solution."
"Our customers find the self-service feature the most valuable. Control-M offers great value to businesses by providing an option to see different flows and control and orchestrate the sequence of the execution. It is easy to use and integrate with different solutions. It is a good solution that is easy to implement and deliver."
"The file transfer, database, and integration features are the most valuable."
"The solution is stable."
"What I like best about BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is that it makes transfers more secure and faster. It has a recovery feature during failed file transfers."
"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."
"It's the reliability. And the message tracking is quite good, where we can go in and see if we have an issue."
"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."
"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."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) also allowed us to connect EDI vendors at will."
"The entire framework is something that is very easy to use, easy to set up, and extremely straightforward. Once you develop a process and once you get it deployed within the process engine, with the latest 6.52 features, the processing engine is actually smart enough to make a decision as to which process engine has less load, and it can exchange messages with that process engine."
"The ease of integration of the SEEBURGER product into SAP was pretty seamless. There wasn't any trouble, there weren't any complexities."
"It is a JavaScript or a Java-based system within their mapping tool. You can actually write a lot of code in there. We can perform a lot of the translations even within our mapping, whereas we used to have to do custom programming on our back-end systems to fully integrate."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer has a scheduler and what they do is capture the steps based on the script, and then they put it into the Control-M job, or task. Any system that has the script behind it the solution can do it."
"The solution lacks a graphical user interface for reporting."
"This solution could be improved by making it possible to better control GUI when interfacing with other systems."
"We'd like it to be easier to maintain the administrative side."
"The structure between the Control-M/Server and Control-M/Agent could possibly be improved."
"The solution should improve the out-of-the box conversion tool for migrations so the percentage result isn't so low."
"The only improvement I would suggest is the license pricing should be a little reduced. Apart from that, I don't see anything else as a major concern with the tool right now."
"Password vaulting would be a feature that should be included."
"API connectivity needs improvement as well as the GUI. The GUI hasn't changed that much in 10 years, but of course, that's already been updated. I would say I'm excited about the screenshots but that's about it."
"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."
"The solution's documentation is not up to the mark and needs to be improved."
"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."
"We don't have much access to the logs or what's happening. So we have to log a ticket with SEEBURGER. We only get a message that something has failed... we have to open a ticket with SEEBURGER for them to tell us exactly what the issue is... I would like us to be able to be more self-sufficient."
"They have their own private cloud. That's the reason we did not go ahead with managing everything by ourselves or moving into the cloud. They said that they're going to be doing it within the next two years, having access to Azure and AWS. That would be something we would like to see."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"On the server side, there are a lot of administration and configuration files that you need to go in and do maintenance on. You have to find them in a certain folder so it's very error-prone and it can be a little time consuming unless it's documented. They could pull some of those individual configuration files into the product itself where there's a better user interface for that."
More BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is ranked 3rd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 21 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 14th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 37 reviews. BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is rated 8.8, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer writes "Adaptable, useful file transfer, and has helpful technical support". 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". BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, 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 BMC Control-M 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.