We performed a comparison between Mule ESB and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, MuleSoft, Software AG and others in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)."It is easily deployable and manageable. It has microservices-based architecture, which means that you can deploy the solution based on your needs, and you can manage the solution very easily."
"Mule ESB is a very easy-to-use and user-friendly solution."
"The most valuable feature of Mule ESB is data transformation, i.e. our interacting with different systems and orchestrating for our business needs."
"The solution has a good graphical interface."
"I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support."
"What Mule provides out-of-box is a sufficient product."
"It's open source, and there are a lot of community resources. Mule ESB makes it easy to connect to other software applications."
"It was pretty fast to develop APIs on this platform, which is something I liked about it. So, the time to value was pretty good."
"The tool's performance doesn't get affected by transformation loads. You can write any number of rules, filtering criteria, transformations, etc."
"Among the most valuable features are the EDI translator and a lot of the components which enable creating compliance sets. Having something standard out-of-the-box and being able to use that has been a huge benefit for us."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"The platform has been very consistent and responsive."
"The solution is flexible when it comes to adding integrations. It is much easier to use than the other tools we have to move the files. Across the board, we can move files in a short amount of time compared to our other existing tools."
"SEEBURGER BIS helps us automate processes. When something is manual and we have to fix the data, then it is really complicated. However, when it's automated, we trust it and the process in the system, so we don't have to go back and fix it. For example, we had a problem with a partner sending 17 files every week, but a few times a year, they wouldn't send files during a certain window. We would escalate this with them. Then, when they caught up and sent the files again, they weren't authenticated. We had to fix this situation before it became a nightmare because our financials were impacted. Also, it was really messy. So, I worked with SEEBURGER to have something automated to pick up the files within a certain window and validate them as accurate. If the files come outside of this window, then we have to approve the loading of them."
"One of the things that SEEBURGER always touts is their ability to do "any to any" formatting... it doesn't matter if you want to take a CSV file or an XML file or a flat file or a PDF file or a structure EDI file; you can transform it from one format to another - any to any or even to the same format - which is a really nice feature."
"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."
"It needs more samples. Also, the dependency on Maven should be removed."
"Mule ESB isn't as secure as IBM. Financial companies go with IBM for that reason."
"We would like to have a built-in logging framework in which we can do auditing."
"The solution's setup needs to be a bit more straightforward and its support needs to respond faster."
"The current version will not be supported for much longer."
"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."
"One area that could be improved is the way that policies are propagated when APIs are moved from one environment to another. It's an issue, but when you develop and test the rest APIs in a lower environment and need to move them, there's a propagation process. This process moves certain aspects of the APIs, like the basic features. But when we move them, the policies don't always move with them. The policies should be able to move so we don't have to redo them manually. There are some APIs we use, but it's a bit tedious."
"The payment system needs improvement."
"They made improvements to the email error alerts that go out, for the EDI technical. Those typically go straight out to the partners. Those messages are significantly clearer and easy to read. The same messages in the front end are not nearly as clear. It's supposed to be the same error, but the message that goes out for EDI is really easy for anybody to read and understand, but you have to be really solution-savvy to understand the message in the system itself."
"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."
"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."
"The initial set up was done by SEEBURGER consulting. It can be complex due to various factors, such as server settings, database settings, and security settings."
"The product is not integrated very well with different cloud providers. We did work with the vendor to build a solution for Amazon, but there is no solution for other cloud providers like Google or Azure. The vendor needs to create adapters so that if we have a requirement to transfer data from our data center to another cloud, outside of Amazon, we would be delighted with that."
"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."
"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."
"It's rather difficult to understand, from the application, what's broken and why it doesn't work. We typically need to get support from them directly, and it's usually in a consulting role, to fix issues."
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Mule ESB is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 45 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 5th in Business-to-Business Middleware with 37 reviews. Mule ESB is rated 8.0, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Plenty of documentation, flexible, and reliable". 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". Mule ESB is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, Oracle SOA Suite, Red Hat Fuse and JBoss ESB, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, IBM B2B Integrator, Microsoft Azure API Management and webMethods Integration Server.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.
