Mule ESB vs. Oracle SOA Suite

Well Suited for:

• REST APIs.
• Rapid API Development.
• Most suitable for integration with SFDC.
• Batch processing.
• Parallel processing.

Less appropriate for:

• Integration with Database.
• Exposing SOAP services.
• Small organizations, because it is super costly.

Incentivized

In comparison to Open source products like Apache Camel and Mule ESB, Oracle ESB is more robust and offers better enterprise capabilities. However, the licensing costs are fairly prohibitive and are preventing widespread product adoption. At our university, we had already purchased the Oracle Campus Solutions ERP suite and hence had little problems integrating their OSB as well.

Incentivized

• As an ESB it provides great flexibility to add/remove systems in the integration easily. Highly scalable.
• Supports any kind of system to be integrated, Supports Java.
• Lightweight.

Incentivized

• It is lightweight and one can easily integrate with different applications, databases, JMS, or Web services through different protocols.
• It helps in building reusable, well-defined services.

Incentivized

• Logging the Database query in production with out changing the log4j level

Incentivized

• Service implementation is not agile like microservices.
• The architecture is so complex and could result in higher latency with so many layers to traverse.
• Deployment of multiple web services in one session

Incentivized

We have had not many issues with Oracle Service Bus and it's very stable for our requirements. It's highly available and helps us implement Tier1 applications on it.

Incentivized

It's an excellent enterprise service bus and has very stable features. We have been using it since 2008. We did hit into some issues. But, recreating the service helped fix many issues. Also, deployment to various environments was easy. Also, the plugin on Eclipse helps to build proxy and business services quick and easy.

Incentivized

We had some issues with MQ connectivity through OSB and our experience was poor with the support team. They do respond. But, it felt like we are ignored and we had bad support. We had to escalate and things used to get dragged for weeks before we get more quality questions on how to pursue investigation.

Incentivized

Hands down, Mule is more cost-effective than Informatica, either on-prem or cloud, and the value only goes up form there. Reusability and ease of creation makes in-house training simple and the end result is we leverage Mule for much more than what we initially considered it for. Having used Oracle and TIBCO before as well, I find they are the tools of yesterday, not able to keep up in terms of functionality or price. Jitterbit would be a more relevant comparison, but Mule won out in the bake-off we did between them.

Incentivized

Mule ESB is an open source tool and would definitely cost less, however is not as sophisticated a product for the business functionality we need at US Cellular.. I have reviewed IBM WebSphere Message Broker, is very cumbersome and not very user friendly. Despite some of the license cost concerns, Oracle Service Bus stands out as an ideal Enterprise Service Bus solution at US Cellular

Incentivized

• Created a means to have a synergy with developers - quickly made us productive
• Ease of integration with Mule connectors - quicker releases
• Initial configuration was a challenge. Would have been more challenging without Mule Support

Incentivized

• We were able to increase efficiency in our lead generation process.
• Improved data driven decisions.
• Reduction in processing time by aligning resources on time.

Incentivized