There is room for improvement on the learning side. I do not have the time to do much training to really understand the product in-depth because it is a vast product, and I am only using about five to ten percent of the product. I feel I can still learn a lot. There can be more training and documentation.

There could also be room for improvement with the stability. Somehow, we experience many issues on the SAP Adaptive side, where it loses the communication between TIBCO and SAP.

Based on my understanding of the market, a trend of TIBCO BusinessWorks Container Edition is going on, which helps one to containerize everything. TIBCO BusinessWorks 5.13 or TIBCO BusinessWorks 5.14 doesn't offer containerization. From an improvement perspective, my company can decide to move to TIBCO BusinessWorks Container Edition.

The technical support's turnaround time is an area where TIBCO needs to consider improvements.

The biggest problem with TIBCO BusinessWorks is the licensing costs. It's too expensive. We are planning to migrate from TIBCO BusinessWorks to Camel. On the enterprise side, we will use Kafka and Pulsar.

It's not just the license that is expensive with TIBCO BusinessWorks. Scaling with the solution is costly because if we need to scale up, we have to buy more memory. That means more money. Solutions like Camel or Pulsar come with built-in options to scale horizontally, vertically, region-wide or country-wide. 

There are many other issues with TIBCO BusinessWorks, actually. For example, TIBCO BusinessWorks files can only be opened if you have TIBCO Designer. This is again more cost on top of what I mentioned above. Compiling or opening a file should not be an additional cost. If a person does not have TIBCO Designer on their machine and they receive a TIBCO BusinessWorks file, they will not be able to understand the logic or go through the source code. That's the biggest limitation. 

TIBCO BusinessWorks mentioned that we can directly inject or connect with Java, but that's not easy. I would say it has many limitations. They will expect us to follow their protocol in injecting Java or any third-party library.

In addition, when we deploy, you have to add a class part. It would be better if we were expected to add a class part only in some cases. This is not user-friendly.

Overall, TIBCO BusinessWorks has not evolved properly over time. So, right now, if you compare it to other solutions that have evolved drastically, TIBCO BusinessWorks will pale in comparison. It's an outdated product.  

I would say that they have to change their original design. The market is such these days that a solution needs to be able to handle live calculations and transactions – millions of transactions per second and billions of transactions per hour. 

For example, if you have a server in the US and you have business users in Japan. You will have an integration with Japan and so the network IO always plays a very critical role when it comes to millions or billions of transactions. What happens in such cases, with the latest technology and tools available in the market, you can add, put memory, or replicate the server per country or per region. You can't do this with TIBCO BusinessWorks. With TIBCO BusinessWorks you just have an option to deploy everything on one server and then access that server.

TIBCO BusinessWorks also needs to introduce multi-trading. It is definitely not there or if it is, it's expensive. 

TIBCO BusinessWorks could be improved with cloud support. 

In the next release, I would like to see the solution having the bucket as an addition.

Pricing is an area that can be improved.

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 communication protocols could be improved. 

The initial setup is not easy.

This solution's cloud could be improved. I don't know whether it was because we didn't have the internal expertise or if it was the product itself, but since they came later—I think only two or three years into the cloud—after many other iPaaS that had been in the cloud for longer, I feel that maybe they haven't matured in terms of the cloud. Even building cloud images is relatively huge compared to other iPaaS services, but I know it's something that is in progress since there are releases almost every day. 

For the on-premise deployment, the memory could be improved. It consumes a lot of memory, so we have to ask our infrastructure team to increase the memory every day. With BusinessWorks, the application or payload can be small, but it still uses a lot of memory. Memory utilization is my biggest worry, so maybe they can optimize on that. 

In the next update, I would like to see support around IoT, internet of things, because we are moving toward that now. We are going to have so many devices that need to connect and communicate. Also, maybe they can gather information and improve their monitoring. They have TIBCO Hawk, but it's not as powerful as other monitoring tools that we have, so we use third-party monitoring applications.

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.

In terms of improvement, for our requirements, it's good enough. Everything that we like to do, we can find it available on the platform.

Features that could be improved are its transformation matrix; the support for other communities. They don't support out of the box - you have to buy adapters or you have to have the technology.

I'd like to see a more user-friendly solution in terms of the development area.

For the chip code container edition, it is recommended to reduce the image size to facilitate setup and accelerate our in-service. By making this change we can then use the optimal size for the best email of the container.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

Areas for improvement would be the cloud fitness of the product and the ease of migrating to newer versions. Its price could also be lower, and its licensing model would benefit from changing to pay-as-you-go to better fit the use of cloud services.

In TIBCO BusinessWorks, the problem is that there are multiple plugins that increase the number of product installations. For example, there is a different plugin for files and mail and different specifications, features, and integrations to install. However, comparing TIBCO BusinessWorks to other products, others don't require multiple installations. Therefore, I recommend minimizing the number of product installations and hard features.

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 cost has room for improvement.

I think TIBCO needs to do a lot in terms of making it a first-class cloud solution. Because the issues that we are facing have to do with the container-based image. It is so big that it makes it very difficult to autoscale.  

They need to do a few things. First, they need to make it smaller, and also to make it really a true cloud citizen. Because if you compare with other solutions, TIBCO is playing catch up in terms of cloud adoption.  

I just received a new version the other day and they have included quite a lot of changes. It is impossible to tell what they have already taken care of. But I have experienced that there are some security vulnerabilities that they need to fix on the Docker image. I do not have the specific details because we have not totally isolated the problem, but there are some vulnerabilities and those are apparent in the TIBCO container edition.  

I would like the solution to be integrated into the cloud. 

One of the main handicaps on version 5 was its development environment. In comparison with other Eclipse-based products, it is not the easiest landing at the first stages of learning. For advanced developers, it results in a simple and direct environment. It also does not facilitate integration with other external tools (release management etc). All these issues are fixed on 6 versions, but we have not migrated at this time.

Pricing is not one of its strengths. Using Tibco BusinessWorks implies adopting a non-trivial set of products (Hawk, Rendez-vous, EMS in most cases), and previous cost models enabled scalability on installation and deployment. I think that current commercial management on the company is betting on promoting a strict model of licensing per product and instance that makes pricing a disadvantage in comparison with other platforms.

Another gap fixed on new releases is cloud approach. We are investing in cloud migration, and currently, all our installation of this product is on-premise. Tibco BW 6 lets you choose on-premise or cloud (Container Edition) deployment. I cannot evaluate it at this time, but this was a gap on the previous version.

Improve Business Studio's stability to further minimize development time.

A possible improvement could be to give the capability to use different profiles for each AppNode when an application is deployed on an AppSpace.

The solution needs integration support.

Currently, it's all very technical and developer-driven. There is no support for a non-technical user to define the integration process. If there was support for integration for them, it would help them define the integration themselves.

More monitoring would also be useful in future releases.

The cost of this product is too expensive for smaller companies or those with a small number of integrations.

There should be more support for cloud-based integration.