Azure API Management vs. IBM webMethods

The range of policies that enable the APIs to loosely couple it with security, rate limit, retry, etc. are good. We can easily tie authentication mechanisms to external and other internal services without having to modify the backend.

Incentivized

With its world-class proven technology, the IBM webMethods products are best suited for solving integration needs, including application connectivity, data aggregation, and data synchronization. The business use cases expand across Healthcare, Aviation, Banking, Insurance, etc., and many other mission-critical systems. Though I feel there is room for improvement where webMethods products are utilized in a containerized platform, especially with the API Management suite of products.

Incentivized

• Management of APIs
• Security of the API through Azure AD, AD B2C etc.
• Providing an outer layer through APIs

• 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

• Cost - the upfront cost is a bit restrictive. I've been told it is because there are a few underlying VMs that are running this service. So if you're just starting out with API management, it can be an expensive proposition. Value increases as you add additional APIs. If you're using Azure B2C for the developer portal, you'll require Standard or Premium since they support AAD integration.
• Security granularity - at time of writing, APIM doesn't support breaking out operations to products. For example, if you have an API that has a GET and a POST operation, and you want the POST operation to require a different subscription. There is a work around, but it makes management a bit messy.
• Developer and Publisher portal - it's a little weird. Microsoft hasn't migrated all the publisher portal functionality into the "native" Azure portal. So some of it feels a little weird - especially when working with the content management side of things for the developer portal.
• Scaling - while it's easy to scale up, the cost of APIM ramps up very quickly. Standard -> Premium is a 4x jump.

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

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

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

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

Azure APIM vs Amazon API Gateway:

1) Azure APIM was a complete package that included a developer portal.

2) We are very Microsoft centric - so the Microsoft product suite aligned very well with our business needs.

3) It was faster and easier to stand up Azure APIM for testing than it was for the Amazon API Gateway.

Incentivized

The two branches of the IBM integration portfolio are coming together nicely, and it's more a question of fully mapping the specific implementation requirements to the respective platform of choice when selecting between IBM Cloud Pak for Integration and IBM webMethods. Pricing and licensing model, cloud strategy, and level of distributed responsibilities and ownership of integration in the organisation can be deciding factors.

Incentivized

I don't know this product

Incentivized

• It’s really pay as you go, so it's not that costly to get in and try it out. There’s no expensive client to buy and manage, but you do need to stay on top of the rapidly changing Azure environment to be sure you upgrade or adjust when needed.
• It’s not great having more than one API tool, but it’s ok to spread out your work, as you always want the right tool for the right job. For example, if you are a Salesforce-heavy organization, I’d go with Mule over Azure.
• It was easy getting an external consultant access to the tool to build their own API for a project they were working on for us.

Incentivized

• webMethods.io Integration is a cost effective approach to integration in isolation
• webMethods.io Integration as a supplement to on-premises integration is pointless and redundant and just adds complexity to the environment and additional costs
• webMethods.io Integration is a tough sell for organizations using Microsoft Azure integration products such as Logic Apps
• webMethods.io Integration has a faster time to market where the use case means standard provided adapters can be used

Incentivized