SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Previous Solutions

AH
Integration Team Lead at Wincanton

We were previously using Mercator as the transformation tool, but it was very old at the time and needed replacing as it was unable to provide SFTP.

View full review »
Choon Hwa Khoh - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Product Test at ams AG

I did not previously use a different solution. 

View full review »
VARUNKUMAR - PeerSpot reviewer
Mgr Value Chain Integration/EDI at a non-tech company with 10,001+ employees

I'm also familiar with OpenText. 

OpenText is priced higher than SEEBURGER. It's why we were trying to find out a different provider, however, it's a very big task as we have a lot of trading partners on OpenText and it will be a big challenge to move away from that provider. Initially, we were thinking of Mulesoft, however, when I talked to my peers I found that Mulesoft gets costly once you start implementing it. Right now, talks are going on as to how to get rid of OpenText, and whether we move everything over to SEEBURGER. OpenText's responsiveness to the customer service team is also not at par with SEEBURGER. I would rate them at around 2.5 out of five. 

Also, there are a lot of hidden areas where we'll have questions, and they're not providing answers. Maybe they're reluctant to provide answers about the cost or things like that. The transparency is less when you compare it with SEEBURGER. We would like to see, for example, more documentation in regards to some areas of OpenText to understand some areas of the product a little bit better.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
JT
Senior Integration Analyst at Ingram Micro Inc.

Before SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) we were running more than two applications to support the entire external partner communication. The partner connectivity gateway had something named Cyclone which was used for communicating with external partners. And then we used Gentran, an IBM mainframe product, to take care of conversion. When we put in the SEEBURGER solution, we replaced Cyclone and Gentran with just the one product. Recently, we have migrated a lot of other legacy softwares to SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) as well.

One of the reasons we switched was that development was easy in SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). Second, the old system was going out-of-support and we needed some solid middleware that could take care of all the existing workflows for us. We found the SEEBURGER solution to be very easy and straightforward, so we went ahead with it. The third reason we went with it was support. We did not have premium support with the old application that we were using. Familiarity with the tool also played a part. We started our SEEBURGER journey in 2008, so our team was very familiar with the tool. Everyone had good hands-on with the development and we were pretty comfortable in that area. So we proceeded with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). When you have a familiar tool and you know that the tool is good in terms of performance, that it is robust and reliable, you definitely have that choice in your mind when you propose a solution.

View full review »
HA
IT Director, Business Applications Technical Services and Integration at a consumer goods company with 10,001+ employees

Without SEEBURGER BIS, there would be a lot of manual work and we would need something else. 10 years before, we had different companies working under this one umbrella, and they have different types of systems doing EDI, etc., then we found SEEBURGER BIS. When we merged together, we merged everything to SEEBURGER BIS, which handles 70 to 75 percent of our invoices going back and forth to our vendors for receiving our orders and purchases. We have completely cut the traditional ways of emailing each other or faxing. That's the old way. SEEBURGER BIS is the way to go.

View full review »
RL
Sr. Software Engineer at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

Right now, we use IBM Sterling B2B Integrator as our EDI platform and are converting over to SEEBURGER BIS. The California team has probably done 85 percent of their conversions. So, they are pretty much up and running. At this point, I have converted roughly 95 of my maps over to SEEBURGER BIS, but none are in production. COVID-19 took a big hit on us, which kind of slowed us down.

We were also using Connect Enterprise, which is another IBM product. Connect Enterprise had reached the end of its life and IBM was no longer supporting it. In addition, it seemed like Connect Enterprise didn't have the capability to handle the file sizes that the insurance side of the business was pushing through.

We switched to SEEBURGER BIS because we want an all-in-one solution for multiple products.

View full review »
LK
IT Business Analyst at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Everywhere in the world used something different before SEEBURGER.

In our American offices, we used TrustedLink, whereas, in Canada, we used Atos. In Europe, they used other packages. In Spain, for example, they used their own desktop version for EDI integration. We have also used SAP PI and others.

I don't know why we switched to the current solutions but it was done in conjunction with our SAP rollout.

View full review »
NM
Team Lead at a transportation company with 201-500 employees

We were already doing EDI previously and using OpenText as a communication platform, as a VAN (value added network). The problem with OpenText is that they'll pass through your messages and the dealings that we've had with them, but they don't really do the message conversions and the like. And we are looking to expand quite a lot in terms of trading partners in the coming years using EDI. With SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), we can just send one message between us and SEEBURGER and they will do all of the hard work with the trading partners. Whereas previously, with OpenText, if each trading partner had a slightly different variant of EDI, we would have to make the adjustments ourselves.

Also, all of the EDI conversion into our ERP was actually done using a bolt-on to our ERP. Because we're moving to SAP at some point, that bolt-on was not compatible. But that is where I gained my experience, because I had to create the mappings between the EDI messages and our core internal procedures.

The move away from our old solution was about the scalability. Previously, I was spending a lot of time doing the mappings myself, as well as the onboarding and dealing with all of the headaches related to that. In addition, because we're moving to a system that doesn't have that EDI bolt-on, which is the SAP solution, we needed to find an alternative. Finally, because we wanted to rapidly increase the number of trading partners that we're connected with, we would have had to take on an additional resource. That's where the price-benefit came in.

View full review »
RB
EDI Competency Manager North America at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

We had a couple of previous solutions. One was Cleo LexiCom. We also had something called EDI Gateway and that's what we were using mainly, prior to this one. 

SEEBURGER is an SAP partner. When we bought SAP, because we were going with one global ERP system, our operation in Europe chose SEEBURGER at the time. I was not part of that decision but I'm happy to say they made a good choice. 

View full review »
JD
Analyst at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

It was ten years ago, but we were using a solution called Sterling Commerce. We switched because of cost.

When we made the decision to go with SEEBURGER, our key selection criterion was that the company had history, that it was an established company. But they were also involved in developing our solution so we thought it was a bigger risk to go with another supplier.

View full review »
MO
Partner For Experience & E-Business at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

We had an older version of webMethods, which was not an EDI translator. Comparing SEEBURGER BIS vs webMethods, the latter was just a communications broker. We knew we needed to switch for a long time. We got to the point where we could no longer upgrade that platform or do anything else because of the heavy customization and programming that had been done to it.

View full review »
JW
Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Before we started with SEEBURGER BIS, we had as many as 13 different integration software spread out across our company. Over the early years that I was here at my organization, we were able to consolidate that down to just SEEBURGER BIS. We reduced a lot of extra costs from using other software products and having a lot of extra things to support. Our support costs went down for infrastructure, etc. Thus, it is nice to have everything fully integrated into one product that can do everything.

The number one reason why I would not want to go back and use another software after having experienced SEEBURGER BIS is its flexibility when it comes to file transfer workflow. You can configure your file transfer workflow completely customized. You can put the steps in any order that you want. Your file transfer flow might have three or 20 steps. You simply bring in those steps as activities in a workflow in any order that you want. For example:

  • If you want to receive a file and immediately transform it
  • Call a database, get some data, and bring it into your workflow.
  • Do a transformation or adjust the line feed. 
  • Write it out to multiple destination systems. 

You can put all those workflow steps in any order that you want. That makes it just like a piece of code which has been abstracted into a front end webpage. If you think about how your code would flow, that is exactly how you can make the software flow. 

Other vendors that I have encountered in other jobs have been a lot more rigid than that. Other vendor software tends to have one canned way that you can run data through the system. You receive a file, maybe call a map and transform the file, and then you write the file out. At the very end of the process, you might be able to call a post-process, where you want to run a shell script. However, usually other software is pretty rigid in nature, such that you have to conform your data flow to how that vendor software works, because it only works one way. Because of that rigidity of other vendors' software, in order to accomplish a full end-to-end workflow, sometimes you have to spin up three different workflows and tie them all together to get all the different steps done that you want. That is not at all the case with SEEBURGER BIS. 

With SEEBURGER BIS, you can string as many different activities together in your workflows as you want. You can put them in any order, like a piece of code. One leads into the next, which leads into the next. It is just very flexible from that vantage point. This makes it so easy to use and reduces the number of moving parts that you need to have. It is just a lot less frustrating not having to conform to how some other vendor software works.

View full review »
JH
Materials Management Team Lead at a university with 10,001+ employees

We had a legacy system called Enterprise Solutions, and it was a healthcare-specific procurement and inventory system that was born in the late 1980s. When we decided to go to SAP in the early 2000s, our legacy system was going to be sun-setted. We had to do something because our then-current product was dying. When we decided to go with SAP, it did not natively deliver the EDI functionality. We went and got SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), we bolted the two together, and moved forward.

View full review »
RA
EDI Analyst at Faurecia

We did not have a previous EDI solution.

View full review »
XS
Enterprise & Tech Ops Hosting Svcs at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees

We switched mostly because of efficiency and cost reasons. Our previous solution required a lot more development and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) is a much more configuration-driven solution.

View full review »
GD
Director at Mylan Inc.

We procured this software to replace webMethods. 

View full review »
DG
Systems Architect EDI/B2B at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees

We used the TrustedLink Enterprise (TLE) solution. We switched because the product did not provide all the features that we needed to grow our eCommerce platform. The SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) was one of a few which provided translation for various formats, communications, and integration into SAP, all under one hood.

View full review »
RL
Head of IT at a pharma/biotech company with 201-500 employees

We were not previously using another solution. 

When SEEBURGER BIS came onboard, we changed our ERP systems so they were pretty much in parallel with that.

View full review »
KE
SAP Global EDI Lead at a construction company with 10,001+ employees

The company was using an IBM platform.

It was the next step away (replacement) from the previous ADI platform that we were using. While I was not onboard at that time, from what I understand, an extensive review was done, not only with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), but with other platforms which they were using with IBM in-house models. The result of that review, including testing, was that they decided and settled on SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS).

View full review »
RB
EDI Competency Manager North America at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Prior to our SAP installation, we had a simple system to send data though a product called ECQ from Compuware. That product no longer exists, as far as I know. It was not very robust in terms of where we were headed in the future.

View full review »
CS
VP Digital Services at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We used to have a different solution. At the time that we bought this tool, we had also acquired another company. That company used to use a different tool. And for us, we were just using AS/400. We were trying to go to a better system that had more EDI capabilities. With the AS/400 we did not have a lot of capabilities that we were looking for in an EDI tool.

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) fit very well with what we were looking for in the solution that we wanted to have in our company.

View full review »
NS
Integration Specialist at a logistics company with 10,001+ employees

We were using IBM Mercator which they now call WebSphere. The move to SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS) started because at that time the company wanted to check into systems which could support new interfaces. The system we had was an old system, so we needed to upgrade it. It was a choice the business had to go through but I wasn't involved in the team that handled the selection.

View full review »
DD
Corporate Director of IT at Flexfab

We used their competitor. This product does the same thing that the previous product did, ten years ago. But the competitor said they were going to stop doing business and supporting the Baan ERP system. So we had to switch and we selected SEEBURGER because they were a recommended EDI partner with Baan software. We migrated all of our EDI maps to SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), from their competition, and then we had to modify them, ever so slightly, to get them to work.

View full review »
it_user649995 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Integration Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

We needed to upgrade our previous EDI tool. That tool did not have a migration path. We looked at many EDI tools and chose SB BIS as the best one available.

View full review »
it_user651516 - PeerSpot reviewer
EDI Consultant at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees

We were using BIS 6.3.5 Q4. The switch was made in order to improve the stability of the solution, as well as to accommodate a higher workload. Also, that platform was reaching its EOL.

View full review »
LK
IT Business Analyst at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We went to SEEBURGER because we needed a global solution for the first time in our company's history. Up until then, each plant used to use its own EDI solution, because we had our own ERP solution. We switched to SEEBURGER to have a global solution.

View full review »
JM
Director, Application Development at a retailer with 501-1,000 employees

We switched from Dell AtomSphere.

View full review »
it_user809403 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We recently migrated from the GenTran mapping tool to Seeburger.

View full review »
it_user651852 - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration Analyst at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We did migrate a few IBM Systems with the Seeburger, as the licensing cost is less and it gives the same flavor as the BIS Suite.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.