Apache Camel vs. Zenbridge

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Camel
Score 6.3 out of 10
N/A
Apache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A
Zenbridge
Score 0.0 out of 10
N/A
N/A
$15
per month
Pricing
Apache CamelZenbridge
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic
$15
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache CamelZenbridge
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CamelZenbridge
Best Alternatives
Apache CamelZenbridge
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Boomi
Boomi
Score 8.9 out of 10
Boomi
Boomi
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.0 out of 10
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CamelZenbridge
Likelihood to Recommend
7.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CamelZenbridge
Likelihood to Recommend
Message brokering across different systems, with transactionality and the ability to have fine tuned control over what happens using Java (or other languages), instead of a heavy, proprietary languages. One situation that it doesn't fit very well (as far as I have experienced) is when your workflow requires significant data mapping. While possible when using Java tooling, some other visual data mapping tools in other integration frameworks are easier to work with.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Pros
  • open source and a great set of component feature set - always latest features available for integration
  • works well with spring boot
  • great community and support for any kind of workflow
  • based on enterprise integration patterns which helps our developers achieve integration tasks with all kinds of API services
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Cons
  • Some of the documentation is a little sparse. In particular, its TCP-based routes use an underlying Netty server, and the interactions between Netty's decoder capabilities and Apache Camel's routing/handler capabilities can be a little muddy at times. In general it is clear which routes and endpoints are the more frequently used and which haven't been given as much attention.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache Camel has been the integration framework of choice, but I was not the person to make the decision to use it. Compared to other competing products like Tibco Business Works, etc., it is free and open source and its licensing policy is acceptable to the management of Cox.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • Very fast time to market in that so many components are available to use immediately.
  • Error handling mechanisms and patterns of practice are robust and easy to use which in turn has made our application more robust from the start, so fewer bugs.
  • However, testing and debugging routes is more challenging than working is standard Java so that takes more time (less time than writing the components from scratch).
  • Most people don't know Camel coming in and many junior developers find it overwhelming and are not enthusiastic to learn it. So finding people that want to develop/maintain it is a challenge.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
ScreenShots