Amazon Web Services vs. IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration vs. Microsoft Azure

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon Web Services
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a subsidiary of Amazon that provides on-demand cloud computing services. With over 165 services offered, AWS services can provide users with a comprehensive suite of infrastructure and computing building blocks and tools.
$100
per month
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM® webMethods offers a hybrid, enterprise-grade integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that allows users to securely control applications, APIs, B2B and files across environments and locations.
$2,500
per month
Microsoft Azure
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Azure is a cloud computing platform and infrastructure for building, deploying, and managing applications and services through a global network of Microsoft-managed datacenters.
$29
per month
Pricing
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Editions & Modules
Free Tier
$0
per month
Basic Environment
$100 - $200
per month
Intermediate Environment
$250 - $600
per month
Advanced Environment
$600-$2500
per month
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration Standard Tier
$2,500
per month
Developer
$29
per month
Standard
$100
per month
Professional Direct
$1000
per month
Basic
Free
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Free Trial
YesYesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesNoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsAWS allows a “save when you commit” option that offers lower prices when you sign up for a 1- or 3- year term that includes an AWS service or category of services.The free tier lets users have access to a variety of services free for 12 months with limited usage after making an Azure account.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Considered Multiple Products
Amazon Web Services
Chose Amazon Web Services
The particular services I am using in AWS is easier to set up and manage than Microsoft Azure. IBM Bluemix/Cloud previously has too many product beta and preview released along with their products. Microsoft also releases too many products in preview or beta.
Chose Amazon Web Services
If I talk about the product capabilities, I would say AWS is better than Microsoft Azure. It also provides excellent network and security services. Additionally, I would say the security and compliance of this product helps me to scale and innovate all my databases, into one …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS provides a vast array of services and, compared to Microsoft Azure licensing costs, is a cheaper alternative.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Both the services are in the field for quite sometime. And the biggest competitor of Amazon Web Services is Microsoft Azure. Though, Azure easily connects with Microsoft services like a jelly, even in AWS its so easy. And the best thing is due to its vast variety community …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Apart from Amazon Web Services, we use Microsoft Azure in some of our projects. I have some basic experience in Google Cloud Platform (GCP) as well. If given a choice, I would prefer using Amazon Web Services over Azure or GCP. I find provisioning of resources relatively faster …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS stands out in its ability to adapt technology more quickly. All the new features, first adapted by AWS, make it the market leader. The key metrics, such as MTTR, are among the best among all other cloud service providers. The AWS dashboard and analytics features are very …
Chose Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services is better among all of them due to its performance, stability, security and navigation. It effectively saves the cost and provides better facilities than the other competitors. It plays great role when it comes to user friendly interface. It also provided …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS has the largest market share and most established and over 200 services for diverse needs. AWS has a very power user interface and pay as you go work well that others. AWS has the by far largest network of data centers for low latency and high availability. The regular …
Chose Amazon Web Services

Better global availability and use across industries.
AWS has a great ecosystem of experts, developers, solution architects and it helps to get to know them at various AWS events across the world
Chose Amazon Web Services
The decision was made to go with AWS because of name recognition and familiarity by contractors we hired. I checked out Google Compute Engine a few years ago, and it did have similar option set, however Google in general was behind Amazon's offerings.
Chose Amazon Web Services
We evaluated Azure, Goggle Cloud, and Amazon Web Services during our cloud computing solution decision. We needed the storage and a pre-installed version of a commercial product. As we were not highly demanding in performance, all candidates were sufficient. However, we found …
Chose Amazon Web Services
At a past company we used Azure; I feel like AWS is always mentioned favorably in compare/contrast conversations regarding Azure specifically, and when I started this new company a couple of years ago, we decided to go with AWS as it seemed to have a near-pristine track record.
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS is as good as any of the major cloud providers. I see a complete parity in this marketplace as innovations by one tend to be replicated by the others in short order. If you are looking to compare, or pilot, cloud hosting providers you must try AWS as they are a very …
Chose Amazon Web Services
OCI and Google Compute Engine are a bit cheaper than AWS but AWS has better chargeback and more granular monitoring of various KPIs. But at the same time, AWS has a learning curve while GCE especially is much easier to use. Microsoft Azur has a much better partner and developer …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS is very widely adopted by our development team and the industry. AWS is investing in new products and services, as well as innovating on existing offerings.
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS, in my opinion, is the most mature and popular cloud. It provides the biggest number of services available and the provider which innovates the most.
Chose Amazon Web Services
Since most of our clients are Office 365 users, Azure holds a lot of benefit in its integration possibilities. However, AWS is still less expensive and easier to manage in my experience. There will come a time though, that I'm sure we will move most clients to Azure. …
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS is the industry leader and is far ahead in terms of a feature rich product offering along with worldwide presence
Chose Amazon Web Services
AWS is Good for startups or FMCG customer but for FSI customer, their relationship is weak, hard to convince our client move to AWS
Chose Amazon Web Services
We like the platform agnostic approach. At the time we selected it (some years back), the security standard was higher and the price point was lower, and the global reach was at least as strong. It was very easy to get started. For our business, we also looked at Akamai and …
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration
Chose IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration
IBM webMethods is far superior when compared to competition like Microsoft Azure. In functionality and capabilities. Better visibility, uptime, efficiency, etc.
Microsoft Azure
Chose Microsoft Azure
Amazon Web Services dominate cloud service market as a de facto market leader in IaaS and PaaS industry. However, Microsoft, with its Azure solution, has proven to be a formidable challenger to Amazon in cloud service, and is slowly but surely closing in the gap. Legacy …
Chose Microsoft Azure
I feel that Microsoft Azure typically outperforms Google Cloud Platform in hybrid cloud capabilities, integration aspects, and, primarily, security compliance features. Azure offered superior integration with Microsoft's enterprise software ecosystem, and it's second to none in …
Chose Microsoft Azure
Mostly due to the ecosystem. I don't think there is anything in AWS that we would be missing out when using Microsoft Azure. We use Microsoft products on on-premise servers and also M365 / Office services that are well supported in Microsoft Azure. The pricing between AWS and …
Chose Microsoft Azure
AWS is good for linux virtual machines and mac virtual machines, Microsoft Azure doesn't do mac VMs. However, in my opinion Microsoft Azure is better in every other aspect, easier to use and just as cost effective.
Chose Microsoft Azure
Azure is more user friendly and provides much required scalability and flexibility.
Chose Microsoft Azure
AWS is the most stable cloud options but Azure has done well in last few years and provides good options specifically for Microsoft customers and who are more familiar with Microsoft technologies like WINDOWS, MS SQL SERVER, GITHUB, VISUAL STUDIO etc. Google cloud is more …
Chose Microsoft Azure
Ease of use. Multiple Data centers across the globe. Load management. Backup and recovery options.
Chose Microsoft Azure
We actually utilized multiple cloud stacks, depending upon the customer environment and need. Those that heavily used MS products (Office on-prem or 365), Teams, etc, found it a better fit, with easier integration, for their needs.
Chose Microsoft Azure
Integration with other Microsoft products makes Azure stand out quite a bit. However, if you need to use open source software and to integrate with Linux systems then AWS or Google Cloud might be better alternatives. Google did not even come close to Azure in terms of …
Chose Microsoft Azure
AWS and [Microsoft] Azure are in a class by themselves, no matter how you look at them or what sub-area or service you focus on. No other cloud provide can match the breadth and ability of these two. Nobody else has the market share either (for a reason). That being said, …
Chose Microsoft Azure
Integration with other Microsoft products makes Azure stand out quite a bit. But if your shop mostly runs open source and Linux then look at AWS or Google Cloud.
Chose Microsoft Azure
Instead of above mentioned alternative we opted for Microsoft Azure because it is more powerful, reliable and pretty much a responsive environment.
Chose Microsoft Azure
  • Easy to use
  • Easy to Manage
  • Easy to Integrate
Chose Microsoft Azure
We do everything Microsoft and wanted the thing that would most easily be compatible with everything out of the gate. Pricing was comparable. It made sense to us.
Chose Microsoft Azure
To be honest despite UI the functionality is almost identical. It came to price and support package.
Chose Microsoft Azure
There are lots of players in this space these days, but Microsoft and AWS are the two most visible and easiest to get connected with. We were using AWS first, and have been using both for some time, but have now converted entirely over to Azure just for the ease of management, …
Chose Microsoft Azure
As we are working mostly on .net projects and Microsoft has very nice integration available for the latest versions, we can get all the latest version for hosting at the earliest time. We can use the same in .Net Core. This should be a very well known product for our any .net …
Chose Microsoft Azure
Like I mentioned earlier, it is more user-friendly when compared to any of the other. It is more flexible with the system you are using that makes it easy to set up with the migration of data. If you can bear the extra price compared to AWS, Azure is more robust, works like a …
Chose Microsoft Azure
Hosting providers are plentiful and all of them are very similar in functionality. Azure boasts a much more robust integration and management platform in my experience than AWS does and is years ahead of many of the smaller cloud providers.
Chose Microsoft Azure
MS was chosen due to the strong partner relationship that already existed.
Chose Microsoft Azure
Azure PaaS platform was better suited for us over AWS (we are a hard core Microsoft shop)
Features
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Web Services
8.4
78 Ratings
2% above category average
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration
-
Ratings
Microsoft Azure
8.5
27 Ratings
3% above category average
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime9.172 Ratings00 Ratings8.126 Ratings
Dynamic scaling8.873 Ratings00 Ratings8.725 Ratings
Elastic load balancing9.369 Ratings00 Ratings8.624 Ratings
Pre-configured templates7.166 Ratings00 Ratings8.225 Ratings
Monitoring tools8.473 Ratings00 Ratings8.326 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images8.366 Ratings00 Ratings8.424 Ratings
Operating system support7.972 Ratings00 Ratings9.026 Ratings
Security controls8.674 Ratings00 Ratings8.626 Ratings
Automation8.325 Ratings00 Ratings8.224 Ratings
Cloud Data Integration
Comparison of Cloud Data Integration features of Product A and Product B
Amazon Web Services
-
Ratings
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration
7.3
22 Ratings
9% below category average
Microsoft Azure
-
Ratings
Pre-built connectors00 Ratings7.721 Ratings00 Ratings
Connector modification00 Ratings6.720 Ratings00 Ratings
Support for real-time and batch integration00 Ratings7.521 Ratings00 Ratings
Data quality services00 Ratings7.520 Ratings00 Ratings
Data security features00 Ratings7.319 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring console00 Ratings7.320 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
Make
Make
Score 9.3 out of 10
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
IBM App Connect
IBM App Connect
Score 9.2 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
IBM App Connect
IBM App Connect
Score 9.2 out of 10
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(90 ratings)
7.8
(18 ratings)
8.8
(96 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.4
(10 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
10.0
(17 ratings)
Usability
7.8
(21 ratings)
7.7
(2 ratings)
8.3
(36 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(1 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
6.8
(2 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.2
(24 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
9.0
(27 ratings)
In-Person Training
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Online Training
7.0
(1 ratings)
8.2
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(3 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon Web ServicesIBM webMethods Hybrid IntegrationMicrosoft Azure
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
This is something that is actually common across most cloud providers. A comprehensive understanding of one's use cases, constraints and future directions is key to determining if you even need a cloud solution. If you are a 2-person startup developing something with a best-scenario audience of 1k DAU in a year, you would very likely best served by a dirt-cheap dedicated Linux server somewhere (and your options to graduate to a cloud solution will still be open). If, however, you are a bigger fish, and/or you are actively considering build-vs-buy decisions for complicated, highly-loaded, six-figure requests per minute systems, global loadbalancing, extreme growth projections - then MAYBE you solve all or part of it with a cloud provider. And depending on your taste for risk, reliability, flexibility, track record - it might be AWS.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
Azure is particularly well suited for enterprise environments with existing Microsoft investments, those that require robust compliance features, and organizations that need hybrid cloud capabilities that bridge on-premises and cloud infrastructure. In my opinion, Azure is less appropriate for cost-sensitive startups or small businesses without dedicated cloud expertise and scenarios requiring edge computing use cases with limited connectivity. Azure offers comprehensive solutions for most business needs but can feel like there is a higher learning curve than other cloud-based providers, depending on the product and use case.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • During the month-end, we experience high resource utilization; however, with AWS's scalability, we can effectively tackle the peak load.
  • With AWS IAM, we don't need to set up complete infrastructure for identity and access management, as AWS provides end-to-end IAM services.
  • With AWS, development has become very easy as it's very quick to spin up and destroy the environment, which saves costs.
Read full review
IBM
  • 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
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Microsoft Azure is highly scalable and flexible. You can quickly scale up or down additional resources and computing power.
  • You have no longer upfront investments for hardware. You only pay for the use of your computing power, storage space, or services.
  • The uptime that can be achieved and guaranteed is very important for our company. This includes the rapid maintenance for security updates that are mostly carried out by Microsoft.
  • The wide range of capabilities of services that are possible in Microsoft Azure. You can practically put or create anything in Microsoft Azure.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • When there is any misconfiguration of EC2 related to SSM Connect. It doesn't clearly states that what particular configuration is missing.
  • Debugging networking related issues could be improved.
  • From the security group page, it's difficult to determine which resource a security group is associated with.
Read full review
IBM
  • 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
Read full review
Microsoft
  • The cost of resources is difficult to determine, technical documentation is frequently out of date, and documentation and mapping capabilities are lacking.
  • The documentation needs to be improved, and some advanced configuration options require research and experimentation.
  • Microsoft's licensing scheme is too complex for the average user, and Azure SQL syntax is too different from traditional SQL.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Amazon AWS
We are almost entirely satisfied with the service. In order to move off it, we'd have to build for ourselves many of the services that AWS provides and the cost would be prohibitive. Although there are cost savings and security benefits to returning to the colo facility, we could never afford to do it, and we'd hate to give up the innovation and constant cycle of new features that AWS gives us.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
Moving to Azure was and still is an organizational strategy and not simply changing vendors. Our product roadmap revolved around Azure as we are in the business of humanitarian relief and Azure and Microsoft play an important part in quickly and efficiently serving all of the world. Migration and investment in Azure should be considered as an overall strategy of an organization and communicated companywide.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
AWS offers a wide range of powerful services that cater to various business needs which is significant strength. The ability to scale resources on-demand is a major advantage making it suitable for businesses of all sizes. The sheer volume of options and configurations can be overwhelming for new users leading to a steep learning curve. While functional the AWS management console can feel cluttered and less intuitive compared to some competitors which can hinder navigation. Although some documentation lacks clarity and practical examples which can frustrate users trying to implement specific solutions.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
As Microsoft Azure is [doing a] really good with PaaS. The need of a market is to have [a] combo of PaaS and IaaS. While AWS is making [an] exceptionally well blend of both of them, Azure needs to work more on DevOps and Automation stuff. Apart from that, I would recommend Azure as a great platform for cloud services as scale.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Amazon AWS
Availability is very good, with the exception of occasional spectacular outages.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
It has proven to be unreliable in our production environment and services become unavailable without proper notification to system administrators
Read full review
Performance
Amazon AWS
AWS does not provide the raw performance that you can get by building your own custom infrastructure. However, it is often the case that the benefits of specialized, high-performance hardware do not necessarily outweigh the significant extra cost and risk. Performance as perceived by the user is very different from raw throughput.
Read full review
IBM
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
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
The customer support of Amazon Web Services are quick in their responses. I appreciate its entire team, which works amazingly, and provides professional support. AWS is a great tool, indeed, to provide customers a suitable way to
immediately search for their compatible software's and also to guide them in a
good direction. Moreover, this product is a good suggestion for every type of
company because of its affordability and ease of use.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
We were running Windows Server and Active Directory, so [Microsoft] Azure was a seamless transition. We ran into a few, if any support issues, however, the availability of Microsoft Azure's support team was more than willing and able to guide us through the process. They even proposed solutions to issues we had not even thought of!
Read full review
In-Person Training
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Online Training
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
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
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
Amazon AWS
The API's were very well documented and was Janova's main point of entry into the services.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
As I have mentioned before the issue with my Oracle Mismatch Version issues that have put a delay on moving one of my platforms will justify my 7 rating.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
Amazon Web Services fits best for all levels of organisations like startup, mid level or enterprise. The services are easy to use and doesn't require a high level of understanding as you can learn via blogs or youtube videos. AWS is Reasonable in cost as the plan is pay as you use.
Read full review
IBM
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.
Read full review
Microsoft
As I continue to evaluate the "big three" cloud providers for our clients, I make the following distinctions, though this gap continues to close. AWS is more granular, and inherently powerful in the configuration options compared to [Microsoft] Azure. It is a "developer" platform for cloud. However, Azure PowerShell is helping close this gap. Google Cloud is the leading containerization platform, largely thanks to it building kubernetes from the ground up. Azure containerization is getting better at having the same storage/deployment options.
Read full review
Scalability
Amazon AWS
No answers on this topic
IBM
I don't know this product
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Using Amazon Web Services has allowed us to develop and deploy new SAAS solutions quicker than we did when we used traditional web hosting. This has allowed us to grow our service offerings to clients and also add more value to our existing services.
  • Having AWS deployed has also allowed our development team to focus on delivering high-quality software without worrying about whether our servers will be able to handle the demand. Since AWS allows you to adjust your server needs based on demand, we can easily assign a faster server instance to ease and improve service without the client even knowing what we did.
Read full review
IBM
  • + : 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.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • For about 2 years we didn't have to do anything with our production VMs, the system ran without a hitch, which meant our engineers could focus on features rather than infrastructure.
  • DNS management was very easy in Azure, which made it easy to upgrade our cluster with zero downtime.
  • Azure Web UI was easy to work with and navigate, which meant our senior engineers and DevOps team could work with Azure without formal training.
Read full review
ScreenShots