We performed a comparison between Oracle Service Bus and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to master the process in one location."
"Monitoring feature that allows tracking of the web's UI development."
"What I found most valuable in Oracle Service Bus is its time to market. It's excellent."
"Its ease of use is valuable. It's very easy to use. It's no code/low code. Oracle Middleware products are also rich in adapters."
"The solution is quite stable overall. We haven't witnessed any performance issues so far."
"The communication between applications is already defined, which means that you don't have to redefine your service infrastructure at the lower level."
"There are always continuous improvements that are happening."
"It is lightweight and one can easily integrate with different applications, databases, JMS, or web services through different protocols."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"It is a very stable product."
"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."
"It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine)."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"The interface console is very slow. Even in production, we need to increase the RAM or CPU. And even after that, the performance is still not good in production."
"The support for GraphQL needs to be improved, and the response time for global support could be faster."
"We have faced a problem with the heap memory side, but that is stable now."
"What needs improvement in Oracle Service Bus is the connectivity between adapters such as the Salesforce adapter and database adapters. The limited number of adapters compatible with Oracle Service Bus makes you want to switch to a different solution."
"The pricing of the product could be better. It's a bit high."
"It would be ideal if they could optimize it a bit."
"The connectivity with the solution is an area that needs to be improved. On occasion, requests are lost due to losing connectivity."
"This solution would benefit from having more cloud-based adapters."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"One area that needs improvement is the version upgrade process. Many customers I've worked with encounter challenges when transitioning from their current version, such as x or 9, to a newer version. The process is not smooth, and they must shift their entire website."
"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle Service Bus is ranked 5th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 25 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Oracle Service Bus is rated 7.8, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Oracle Service Bus writes "Enables us to do a lot of aggregation and routing, but API response can be a problem if the payload is heavy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Oracle Service Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Red Hat Fuse, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Azure Data Factory. See our Oracle Service Bus vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
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.