Likelihood to Recommend 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.
Read full review Zapier is perfect for simple integrations and setting up generally low-volume accounts that require very little configuration and maintenance. For a distributed structure where a client/outside party is responsible for billing, it’s easy to create an account, put them on a low-cost plan, configure a simple integration and teach them how to alter the setup. Its webhook-based setup is perfect for many simple use cases and there’s no reason to use a more complex or expensive solution.
However, if you have integrations that are increasingly complex (involve parsing, multiple non-linear steps, the integration of non-native APIs), significant in overall volume/data or require additional features (time delays for API limits), Zapier likely isn’t your best choice. Other integration platforms offer higher levels of customization and capability, though they’re typically significantly more complex and expensive.
Read full review Pros Easy to use Priced competitively Supports robust and resilient integration solutions Read full review Ease of use - multiple people in the organization can set up and run Zaps per their specific use cases without much training. Connectivity - Zapier is able to connect to multiple applications we use on a regular basis. Functionality - Zapier provides embedded functionality within the app itself (email, data conversion), but also appropriate triggers and actions for apps it connects to. Versatile - Zapier can execute complicated and simple tasks and thus has many use cases. Read full review Cons Complex logic is hard to understand in simple diagrammatic user interface User interface too simplistic for solutions that are complicated or go against the grain Runtime observability could be improved Read full review Being able to turn off one leg of a Zap without having to delete it or turn the whole Zap off Not all fields populate when using certain aspects of Salesforce, but that could be an SF issue Communication when support is actually needed basically doesn't happen Read full review Likelihood to Renew Zapier is now very much an integral part of our business and we could not operate without it!
Read full review Usability Zapier is very user-friendly. They walk you through each step of the zap-building process in an orderly and easy to understand way. Each step of the zap is tested before moving onto the next step. For simple zaps, you can have them up and running within minutes. For more complicated zaps, it may take some experimentation, but Zapier is there to help you troubleshoot.
Read full review Support Rating Before we purchased Zapier, I contacted support and asked them if Zapier could support my intended workflow (this is actually a selection on their support form - awesome). Within 2 hours, I was contacted by a support team member who seemed sure it would work, but granted me premium access for 2 weeks to try it out for myself. Sure enough, it did! Ever since then, support has replied rapidly to any problems I have experienced and answered my questions within a few sentences.
Read full review Alternatives Considered 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 Zapier is a much more mature platform with much more software that you can integrate into and they add to their portfolio every month Zapier has more functions for each software they connect Zapier has their own services that are very useful They have so many existing work flows that you can easily add Read full review Return on Investment 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 Read full review It saves us hours of time every week being able to connect services automatically. It enables automations to happen that would not otherwise be possible at all. It allows us to choose other software for specific purposes without the limitations of only the built-in connectivity. Read full review ScreenShots