GNU Make vs. Jitterbit

GNU Make is a great tool for simple builds where language-specific options are not available, or to provide shortcuts for common commands (e.g., "make build" as shorthand for "go build ..." with a bunch of flags). However, it is complementary to other build systems. It does not replace them, which is perhaps one of its greatest strengths as well (works with existing ecosystem instead of trying to do everything). GMU Make it simple to get started with, and the philosophy of understanding how sources map to outputs, as well as the dependency graph, are beneficial.

Incentivized

This is a great tool for bringing data out of your locked, internal systems and getting it into the cloud. It meshes well with Salesforce and is fairly easy to use, helping the transition from other older, more complex tools into a more modern environment. It has lots of competition in this space and some are better than others, but if your data is straight forward and you know it well, Jitterbit will get the job done. If you are not as close or comfortable with your data and need to do some wildly complex migrations, there might be better packages out there for you.

Incentivized

• Performance and accuracy of cross-module dependencies.
• Simple to write and easy to understand.

Incentivized

• UI is super easy to understand with a low learning curve so admins can figure it out and maintain it without breaking anything.
• It's FREE! There's a paid version too but I like that you can use most of the features for free and they're not pushy with buying.
• There's a great user community that you can google and ask any questions. Most problems I've encountered have been posted and answered already.

Incentivized

• No dependency management tools (but there are no cross-platform tools of this type anyway)
• Tedious to do cross-compilation (Debug & Release builds, 32- and 64-bit builds, x86/ARM builds)

Incentivized

• Migrating operations from QA to Production work well for initial deployment, however, when migrating an update to an existing job to production, sometimes certain project items are duplicated. This is not the end of the world... the duplicates can be removed, but would be nice if it was not required.
• I have not found a way to trap under-the-covers SOAP errors (for example, when a query you are running against Salesforce takes too long). You get a warning error in the operation log that the job only pulled a "partial" file, but it does not fail.

Incentivized

I have been evaluating other tools as a continuous improvement practice. I would like something that would be easier to use for a non-technical user. I work for a small organization and have no back-up for Jitterbit if something happens to me. We don't have the technically savvy employees to understand it.

In general, it is fair to say the support is sufficient although we do not deal with support directly. There are a lot of forum people chiming in with suggestions or recommendations of particular usage or issues we run into. Since it is open software, patch and fixes will be available from time to time. A lot of information is available in the web now for knowing GNU Make from learning, example, teaching, etc.

Incentivized

They have some of the best support of any software vendor that we use. They always get our issues resolved quickly

I'm a full-stack developer that has used various build tools, including Maven, Gradle, and NPM/yarn. For our C projects, I also investigated CMake and Ninja, but they seemed more difficult to learn and more tedious to work with. GNU Make is a single binary that can be easily downloaded, even for Windows under MingW32, is straightforward to learn, and works pretty well despite its age.

Incentivized

Evaluated Dell Boomi and Celigo as alternatives prior to purchasing Jitterbit. We went with Jitterbit at that time because we could handle all changes ourselves without any assistance from Jitterbit, and we liked their size and nimbleness. Dell Boomi was too big for us, and Celigo at that time did not have a self-service model. Every change had to go through them (although that has since changed). We were not in a position to be able to wait for someone to make changes for us given the rate of change within the business.

Incentivized

• Streamline the build based on a lot of existing component being done, reusable.
• Commonly understandable, therefore, rampup effort is small.

Incentivized

• The time it takes to connect systems has reduced by orders of magnitude. Previously, we would custom-develop connectors between various systems and they would all be managed by different vendors. With Jitterbit speed-to-deploy and the efficiency gained by managing all connections in one dashboard has been the greatest piece of the ROI.

Incentivized