TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Apache Camel vs. BG-BCons EDX vs. Microsoft BizTalk Server

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Apache Camel

    Score7.5 out of 10
    N/AApache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A

    BG-BCons EDX

    N/AN/ABG-BCons' EDX EDI-brokerage solution provides end-to-end capabilities to support material flow including:​ - Receiving long- and short-term customer demand​ - Calculating material demand through a MRP-logic​ - Forwarding material demand to suppliers​ - Issuing invoices and tracking payment status (in case of selfbilling)​N/A

    Microsoft BizTalk

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AN/AN/A
    Pricing
    Apache CamelBG-BCons EDXMicrosoft BizTalk
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Apache CamelBG-BCons EDXMicrosoft BizTalk
    Free Trial
    NoNoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details
    More Pricing Information
    Best Alternatives
    Apache CamelBG-BCons EDXMicrosoft BizTalk
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    Apache Camel
    Score7.5 out of 10
    Apache Camel
    Score7.5 out of 10
    Enterprises
    TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
    Score8 out of 10
    TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
    Score8 out of 10
    TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
    Score8 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Apache CamelBG-BCons EDXMicrosoft BizTalk
    Likelihood to Recommend
    7.9
    (11 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (7 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Usability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.0
    (2 ratings)
    Support Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    5.0
    (3 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Apache CamelBG-BCons EDXMicrosoft BizTalk
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Apache
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    BizTalk is well suited as middleware. Where you wish to translate an input file into an output file and send it to some endpoint. In our case, we used it to convert and send files to SAP. In many ways, it very flexible, and you can do almost anything you want with it. In many ways, it's a better solution than your SAP XI or PI as middleware, since it's much less expensive, and allows you do interface with non-SAP systems.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Apache
    • Camel has an easy learning curve. It is fairly well documented and there are about 5-6 books on Camel.
    • There is a large user group and blogs devoted to all things Camel and the developers of Camel provide quick answers and have also been very quick to patch Camel, when bugs are reported.
    • Camel integrates well with well known frameworks like Spring, and other middleware products like Apache Karaf and Servicemix.
    • There are over 150 components for the Camel framework that help integrate with diverse software platforms.
    • Camel is also good for creating microservices.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    • It is very user friendly. Users can change rules during run time and change workflow.
    • Huge capacity for queueing messages. It supports all types of adapters like Oracle, Salesforce, SMTP, FTP, etc. Also users can built custom adaptors.
    • If users want to dynamically deploy their solution without any downtime, this is a perfect solution. BizTalk will be a good fit, especially for public-facing websites.
    • Well-proven in the market. I used it when developing a website for Virgin Trains, catering more than 800K user requests per day.
    • Helps in load balancing.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Apache
    • didn't work well when our developers tried to transform heavy data sets
    • Apache Camel's whole logic is based on java so team needs to have a great skill set in java
    • if there are a handful of workflows then Apache Camel's full potential can't be realized
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    • Microsoft BizTalk is over engineered for some situtations
    • Microsoft BizTalk can be frustrating to use as it forces you to use the GUI as opposed to code
    • Microsoft BizTalk is very resource intensive to create integrations
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    BizTalk will always be required at this hospital.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    I gave a 7 because this product BizTalk does need time and training to get familiar with the usability and features, it is not that easy to use.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    BizTalk Server has been supported for more than 15 years. It is well proven in the market. Microsoft has provided excellent support with technical issues.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    Make sure you have everybody and all depts. On board during testing on test server.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Apache
    If you are looking for a Java-based open source low cost equivalent to webMethods or Azure Logic Apps, Apache Camel is an excellent choice as it is mature and widely deployed, and included in many vendored Java application servers too such as Redhat JBoss EAP. Apache Camel is lacking on the GUI tooling side compared to commercial products such as webMethods or Azure Logic Apps.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    BizTalk was selected here mainly because it is easy to integrate to a .NET application (most of them are Web Service, WCF SOAP, WCF REST and Web API) and many backend databases are Microsoft SQL Server. Another benefit is that the monitoring job is easy to set up and centralize with other .NET application monitoring jobs.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Apache
    • 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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    BG-BCons d.o.o.
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    • A positive impact has been the quicker turnaround time of a part request and that part showing up in SAP using Biztalk as middleware.
    • A somewhat negative impact has been the somewhat insufficient error logging/message capture settings that Biztalk provide. This has caused occasional delays when attempted to create parts for the business.
    • A somewhat negative impact has been the need to have a specialized developer who understands Biztalk to troubleshoot issues with the Biztalk and SAP interaction when creating parts, and when adding new fields to the parts.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots