Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT vs. IBM webMethods

Go Anywhere is perfect for moving data between systems. It is great for pulling data and emailing it or sending it to another server. However, Go Anywhere is limited as an ETL tool. It is not good for large datasets. When we had to move millions of rows from one server to another, it totally choked.

Incentivized

In any scenario where a distributed enterprise IT landscape needs a unified approach to solve the challenges of enabling a common information supply chain where different stakeholders as well as citizen developers can be empowered to contribute, participate and own their own parts of the integration landscape - IBM webMethods offers a capable, architecturally sound and cost efficient way of supporting a wide range of enterprise system integration needs.

Incentivized

• For an FTP server it is robust but very easy to use and configure.
• For a project manager for file transfers, it allows you to do nearly anything, from simple file move to file rename, move, zip, and create a new folder location to drop the file in.
• GoAnywhere has a gateway device that allows for securing the traffic coming from outside your network in without exposing too much of your network.

• Translate the data into required format based on system
• Handles good amount of load and tranefer data into chunks and very much accurate
• Administration is very easy and easily understable and it has goos secuity features
• Schedulers works well for pub/sub message pulling and pushing

Incentivized

• In the beginning, when implementing, it can take a while to understand how it works thoroughly.
• Due to the added abilities learning to configure the software can take some time.
• Training for this product will cost extra. The training is also not excellent.
• The software seems glitchy at times, sometimes being slow or corrupting jobs.

Incentivized

• Clarifying the ongoing and near future roadmap developments in terms of capabilities and architecture
• Merging features, patterns and platform tooling with the rest of the Cloud Pak for integration toolkit
• Adding additional support for AI-driven development, low-/no-code features, and code assistant features

Incentivized

The webMethods platform is a fantastic tool for modernizing information systems. It's easy to use and delivers rapid results.The platform is focused on innovation and is accelerating its improvement with the acquisition by IBM.

Incentivized

Since using it and having time to work with it, its process and actions are growing on me and once a project is created one can implement across numerous location or platforms

The webMethods product has a very user-friendly and easy-to-use interface.A weak point is the My webMethods Server portal (administration and monitoring portal for the on-premise platform). This weakness has been addressed thanks to the control plane on the hybrid version of the product. This version should be highlighted and used to ensure a very fluid and functional interface.

Incentivized

The webMethods platform is very stable and does not cause incidents: if it is well configured and tailored at the base. Infrastructure incidents represent 20% of incidents (full disk, memory peaks, etc.) 80% of incidents come from the implementation of the code in the platform. If a code is not optimized and a high volume is observed in production, this can cause incidents. Similarly, if all error cases or conditions are not handled in the code, this can cause errors. Finally, there can be common errors if the applications connected to the platform do not return quality data or are unavailable.

Incentivized

The webMethods platform is designed to handle a high volume of small messages. It's a tool for continuous processing.The incidents I've seen involving application performance declines are caused by: - ​​Code optimization issues - File size issues or fragmentation of the transmitted file - Misuse of the platform (batch processing) - Monitoring data was not purged, and the user was working with millions of data points

Incentivized

They would help us to identify the problem and provide a solution every time. Support also will answer questions about what the application can do and how, and it would allow you to submit enhancements requests for consideration to be included in future versions.

In the majority of the tickets I've created, support has been very responsive and provided the right solutions or solutions.Resolving a ticket also depends on the information provided by the creator. It's important to provide the technical context and information about the environment, as well as information to help the support team reproduce the incident.

Incentivized

We received in-person training from the webMethods team. We received standard training from the vendor and custom training on specific security topics.The training sessions went well but remained very standard and did not adapt to the client's specific business. In-person training is more suitable for rapid skill development. It is necessary to practice for a few weeks to ensure familiarity with the tool.

Incentivized

I found clear and easy-to-follow training with realistic use cases for quick understanding and a 360° view of the features. The lesson format allows you to progress and learn by breaking down the allocated time.The technical courses are described step by step, allowing you to quickly get to grips with the products

Incentivized

Implementation was straight forward. We paid for 50 hours of professional service in case, we need help. We end using only 10 hours. I have only 1 month to convert over 120 scripts from FTP voyager to goanywhere. Old script was had written using bat files. Some of the batch file were written by some other person, who passed away. Documents for old script was not in details. With the professional service, I was able to convert all script within windows

When implementing webMethods, it's essential to have the right support and guidance.It's important to map out the interactions, document them, prepare test cases, and implement them while making maximum use of the product's native features.Additional tools must also be planned to automate deployments, visualize logs, and monitor the platform.

Incentivized

At the time we were evaluating a managed file transfer system, we initially looked at Ipswitch. It did not have a web based interface and the overall price was extremely higher than GA MFT. The solutions offered by GA MFT were significantly more attractive for our needs as an organization.

Incentivized

webMethods.io IntegrationDescriptionWe uses webMethods.io Integration to solve some of our application to applications and business to business integration needs. It is the Integration Platform as a Service solution that we use in a mix with our continued use of webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks on-premises. For any solutions that meet the use cases that we deem an appropriate fit for running in the cloud, we build those solutions using webMethods.io Integration. More specifically, we use webMethods.io Integration to synchronize changes in one application or system, in another application or system, by shipping data mutations via integration messaging and API calls. We also use webMethods.io Integration to integrate with external organizations. Our trading partners and supply chain partners provide APIs that we consume, and vice versa, to notify each other of business process events as they occur in the respective organizations. Please provide some detailed examples of things that webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) does particularly well. Easy to usePriced competitivelySupports robust and resilient integration solutions please provide some detailed examples of areas where webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) has room for improvement. These could be features that are hard to use, missing functionality, or just things that you'd like to see done differently. Complex logic is hard to understand in a simple diagrammatic user interface too simplistic for solutions that are complicated or go against the gain runtime observability could be improved please describe some specific scenarios based on your experience where webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) is well suited, and/or scenarios where it is less appropriate. We don't use webMethods.io Integration for scenarios where we need to integrate to on-premises legacy applications that have limited support for modern security controls such as OAuth 2.0 and transport encryption. Likewise, we don't use it for solutions that involve any of our systems that are controlled by safe-working processes. For those scenarios, of which we have many, we maintain on-premises webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks instances to build and execute and support and monitor those solutions. This then requires us to hook our on-premises integration platform up to the webMethods.io Integration cloud, to ship messages between the two integration platforms. This all begs the question if a cloud solution cannot be used for all use cases or scenarios that the business has, then why add the complexity of using the cloud at all if you still need to maintain an on-premises solution to support the non-cloud appropriate scenarios. What positive or negative impact (i.e. Return on Investment or ROI) has webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) had on your overall business objectives?webMethods.io Integration is a cost-effective approach to integration in isolationwebMethods.io Integration as a supplement to on-premises integration is pointless and redundant and just adds complexity to the environment and additional costswebMethods.io Integration is a tough sell for organizations using Microsoft Azure integration products such as Logic AppswebMethods.io Integration has a faster time to market where the use case means standard provided adapters can be used describe how webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) stacks up against them and why you selected webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud). For any organization which is already using Software AG products on-premises, such as webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks, or Universal Messaging, evaluating and using webMethods.io Integration is the path of least resistance. It will be incredibly easy for your webMethods team to get up to speed on how to use webMethods.io Integration, and start developing new solutions on it. However in my opinion you should only add cloud to your integration product portfolio if you believe you can move 100% of your integration needs to the cloud. Otherwise, you will need to maintain an on-premises integration solution anyway, which means you end up with a more complex IT landscape by adding cloud to supplement on-premises integration for little benefit in terms of cost, complexity, and resourcing requirements. For organizations that are not already a Software AG shop, you should evaluate webMethods.io Integration on its merits, however, it's usually the right decision to double down on your existing products and vendors if you have no big issues with the current state. This is to say that if you are a Microsoft shop then adding Azure cloud products to your portfolio is pretty much inevitable, and avoiding the complexity of multiple clouds should also be something organizations consider.

Incentivized

I don't know this product

Incentivized

• GA has made life easier for our employees. Many processes that used to take a lot of time are now automated or semi-automated using GA.
• GA has helped our IT team be far more productive. It would take weeks to put together code that we can do in GA in a day or less.

Incentivized

• + : We and our customers gain time with automatic processes
• - : It takes a lot of time to design API
• - : Java is slow. So we need to put a lot of time into flows improvments to reach our goals.

Incentivized