We performed a comparison between IBM InfoSphere MDM and Microsoft MDS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Master Data Management (MDM) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."When users update their information on one product, the data is sent to a database. My approach was to maintain a master data record, ensuring that each platform loads the latest updated record. Instead of having three separate records, the system keeps one master data record, storing the historical records for reference."
"The features that are most valuable are the governance, the end-profiling and the ETL which allows you to see the metadata repositories."
"There are not really many areas of the product that need improvement because the product stays up-to-date with data management needs."
"The advantage is that the matching engine is very good, so that's why customers generally prefer it. From the inbuilt data model perspective, IBM MDM is good."
"The most valuable feature is the administration console."
"One of the main features I have found useful is the integration with Azure active directory."
"It has a very good feature called Excel plug-in. You just have to install the plug-in, and then it directly connects to the MDS instance where you can maintain and manage your data and publish it right through Excel. You don't need to go to the front end to make any changes. It has easy integration with SQL Server, and you can use SSIS to do the ETLs. It is a part of the Microsoft stack. It works with most of the Microsoft stuff."
"Enables non-technical people to directly interact with the BI system."
"The backup and restore functionality are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"The ease of use is valuable."
"The best thing about it is that it comes with the Microsoft package."
"Technical support is very good."
"The product is really only created for large organizations."
"We also want better cloud integration, so we could do things in the cloud if we needed to. This would be a good feature to add in a future release."
"The tool is difficult to understand from a customer perspective and for developers."
"IBM InfoSphere MDM's UI is complicated. It also needs to improve its on-prem configuration."
"From my understanding, MS, as of 2021, will not maintain the product going forward."
"I do not like using Silverlight and Internet Explorer. The new 2019 version gets rid of that, which is one of the reasons why we are looking to switch."
"The solution could be better integrated into Microsoft's other products."
"The Microsoft license cost could be lower."
"Microsoft MDS isn't getting strong support because Microsoft is focusing more on cloud solutions."
"Stability can be fragile at times. If you are not attentive or make a mistake, it can cause problems."
"It would be a better option to have an on-cloud version."
"The stability could be improved."
IBM InfoSphere MDM is ranked 4th in Master Data Management (MDM) Software with 9 reviews while Microsoft MDS is ranked 2nd in Master Data Management (MDM) Software with 18 reviews. IBM InfoSphere MDM is rated 7.4, while Microsoft MDS is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM InfoSphere MDM writes "Provides inbuilt data model and good matching engine". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft MDS writes "Useful Excel plug-in, good scalability, and good integration with SQL Server and other Microsoft products". IBM InfoSphere MDM is most compared with Informatica MDM, IBM Master Data Management on Cloud, SAP Master Data Governance, TIBCO EBX and Reltio Cloud, whereas Microsoft MDS is most compared with Informatica MDM, Profisee, SAP Master Data Governance, TIBCO EBX and SAS MDM. See our IBM InfoSphere MDM vs. Microsoft MDS report.
See our list of best Master Data Management (MDM) Software vendors.
We monitor all Master Data Management (MDM) Software 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.