We performed a comparison between Apache Airflow and Boomi AtomSphere Flow based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup was straightforward and it does not take long to complete."
"The solution's UI allows me to collect all the information and see the code lines."
"Apache Airflow is in Python language, making it easy to use and learn."
"The product integrates well with other pipelines and solutions."
"I like the UI rework, it's much easier."
"Its user-friendly interface makes it straightforward to operate, offering a plethora of features for data preparation, buffering, and format conversion."
"It's stable."
"Since the solution is programmatic, it allows users to define pipelines in code rather than drag and drop."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its core integration with Boomi AtomSphere because it's extremely easy to tap into any informational system of a company."
"In the long run, if you have a good team, solution architect, and an architect from Boomi's side, then it is a good tool from an ROI perspective since it can help save money."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is integrated through APIs, it exposes the API and any product can call the APIs in the queue. Additionally, it is secure."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is very easy to develop and maintain compared to other tools like SAP HANA Cloud Integration or Cloud Platform."
"There is an area for improvement in onboarding new people. They should make it simple for newcomers. Else, we have to put a senior engineer to operate it."
"One specific feature that is missing from Airflow is that the steps of your workflow are not pipelined, meaning the stageless steps of any workflow. Not every workflow can be implemented within Airflow."
"The problem with Apache Airflow is that it is an open-source tool. You have to build it into a Kubernetes container, which is not easy to maintain, and I find it to be very clunky."
"The dashboards could be enhanced."
"Apache Airflow could be improved by integrating some versioning principles."
"Enhancements become necessary when scaling it up from a few thousand workflows to a more extensive scale of five thousand or ten thousand workflows."
"The dashboard is connected into the BPM flow that could be improved."
"For admins, there should be improved logging capabilities because Apache Airflow does have logging, but it's limited to some database data."
"The solution's user interface building needs improvement."
"The development effort with Boomi AtomSphere Flow is more when you compare it with other tools, which is a drawback and an area of improvement."
"Its stability could be improved."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly. The whole solution is used through an interface and it could always be improved."
Apache Airflow is ranked 2nd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 31 reviews while Boomi AtomSphere Flow is ranked 23rd in Business Process Management (BPM) with 4 reviews. Apache Airflow is rated 8.0, while Boomi AtomSphere Flow is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache Airflow writes "Enable seamless integration with various connectivity and integrated services, including BigQuery and Python operators ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Boomi AtomSphere Flow writes "A competent solution for integrating enterprise-grade software". Apache Airflow is most compared with Camunda, Informatica Cloud API and App Integration, IBM BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and AutomateNOW, whereas Boomi AtomSphere Flow is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, Pega BPM, Mendix and AWS Step Functions. See our Apache Airflow vs. Boomi AtomSphere Flow report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.