Anonymous UserDatabase Administrator at a manufacturing company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ease of usability is the most valuable feature. It's very easy and quick to set up. It also has a central hub as opposed to GoldenGate which is one direct interface. For GoldenGate I would have needed three interfaces whereas with HVR I have a central interface that manages everything."
"The solution is stable. We've never faced any stability issues."
"The compare feature is the most valuable piece of it."
"The solution is very scalable. It can handle a lot. We have encryption plus integration servers running on that platform currently."
"The solution is stable. We haven't had any serious technical issues."
"It is user friendly, it's not complex."
"The most valuable features are the stability and the time to market."
"The most valuable part of the solution is the ease-of-use and ease of deployment."
"The most important thing is that it is easy for developers to work with."
"It is very stable. It is a market leader, and it has connectors to many of the legacy systems. It also has enterprise cloud connectors."
"The high availability, tolerance, and load balancing features are top-notch. Its scalability features are also pretty cool."
"I would like for them to incorporate additional transformations. A valuable aspect of the product is that it does inflight transformations and that could be expanded."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"The documentation can be laid out better to make it easier to find things, and I really wish there was built-in support for changing passwords. Some features don't work as advertised for the platform/repository database, and HVR is not always the fastest at getting results."
"Technical support is average. It's not the best."
"I'd like to see a new cloud approach in the next release. They need to work on integrations, stability and management issues on their cloud platform."
"They don't support out of the box - you have to buy adapters or you have to have the technology."
"There are not many plugins available to integrate the databases. We have to write it in Java and integrate it. The developers should have more knowledge. These are the three main aspects that they could improve."
"The container-based image is too large and this makes auto-scaling difficult."
"The cost of this product is too expensive for smaller companies or those with a small number of integrations."
"Its price can be improved. For medium enterprises, it is a very expensive tool. In the market, you won't get many resources for this solution. You won't find many developers in the market very easily. The latest version of TIBCO (6.4 or 6.x) is not very stable. It has got many issues. We have raised this with TIBCO, and they are taking a lot of time to come up with a fix, which is making us move away from this product. Some of the performance-tuning aspects are also missing in version 6. They should provide performance-related fixes, which will be helpful for the customers. If you are migrating from the current version to the container-supported version, it is quite expensive. The product has evolved, but it is very pricey. That's one of the challenges. They have provided all the features that are there in other products, but this is a platform upgrade. The platform has completely been changed from 5.x to 6.x, and we can't use the same environment. We can't run both versions on the same server as VM. The development environment is entirely different. In version 5.x, there was a proprietary designer. Now, it has common plug-ins developed on top of Eclipse."
"The Business Studio tool can be improved, which is the tool for designing the processes. Improving the Business Studio tool will make this solution more stable. It has a steep learning curve, and it is pretty tough to learn."
"I don't have the exact information, but I know it is high, and it is on a yearly basis. There is no additional cost for what we're doing. We're always open to doing things cheaper, so we might potentially implement a different solution."
"My understanding is that the licensing is very costly."
"It is a bit expensive for medium-sized companies. If you are migrating from the current version to the container-supported version, it is quite expensive. The existing licensing will not work because the product platform itself is different."
"Its price policy has changed quite a lot in the last two years. It was extremely expensive previously. Nowadays, you can buy a license for BusinessWorks for €2000. Looking at what you get in return in terms of support, TIBCO community, and stability, it is fairly reasonable. It is not too expensive."
HVR Software is ranked 24th in Data Integration Tools with 3 reviews while TIBCO BusinessWorks is ranked 13th in Data Integration Tools with 8 reviews. HVR Software is rated 8.0, while TIBCO BusinessWorks is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HVR Software writes "Has one central interface that manages everything and is easy and quick to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO BusinessWorks writes "Stable and has connectors to many of the legacy systems, but needs better pricing and fixes for stability issues in the latest version". HVR Software is most compared with Qlik Replicate, Oracle GoldenGate, AWS Database Migration Service, SSIS and Informatica Cloud Data Integration, whereas TIBCO BusinessWorks is most compared with Mule Anypoint Platform, Spring Cloud Data Flow, Denodo, webMethods Integration Server and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. See our HVR Software vs. TIBCO BusinessWorks report.
See our list of best Data Integration Tools vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration Tools 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.