IBM App Connect vs. Vertify

- great when you need to integrate applications without any message lost or duplicated and when transnationality is important - if you need the highest throughput possible and not much (or not at all) mapping is required, a system like Kafka is more appropriate

I would recommend it, as VertifyData exactly fit our use case. I can't speak for all use cases and all connectors - naturally - but the ones we are using and have explored so far, work perfectly well. Also, being a person myself that is not fluent in SQL or JSON or API language in general, I was still able to create all workflows our company needed myself. Which I consider a huge benefit.

• Just the ability to display and consume data through a single dashboard makes this a great application for our business purposes.
• With the ability to consume their exposed API, data validation and manipulation becomes a breeze.

Incentivized

• Communication.
• Follow up.
• They're constantly trying to improve.

• The development and the transformation capability is not so great. I believe IBM is looking to incorporate some of features of IBM APP Connect into API Connect.
• The authentications features are no way close to CA API Management (f.k.a Laye r7).
• The development experience is not as good as Apigee's.
• The GUI should be improved. Maybe the product team should see the other API management tools in their offering.

Incentivized

• Automated error trouble-shooting is not always clear/helpful
• Clearly distinguishing internal errors vs. external errors
• Perhaps a blog where users can interact with questions + solutions

It is the best on-premise application to cloud integration in the market. I guess IBM is planning to integrate IBM App Connect with the IBM API Connect solution.

Incentivized

You can do some really powerful things with this system. The overall design is an attempt to make configurable some of the routine tasks/common functionality, but allow for development/customization of the core of the application.

Incentivized

Creating a mapping between source and target while also using lookups and transformations is not trivial. And VertifyData solved this reasonably well, at least all users in my organization understood it pretty quickly.

It is not the easiest user interface to read/understand. However, once you understand how it works, then using it is not that bad. It's hard to remember what feature is listed under what tab (Manage vs. Define). A suggestion would be to get all call to actions on the same page

Support is good, however it takes longer than expected to get responses. When bugs are reported they often seem to fall into a black hole.

Incentivized

We did not select Cast Iron as our iPaaS solution, it was the weakest competitor in the field that we evaluated. Our experience was that it was not nearly as easy to learn, without in-depth training and guidance, and the developer UI was extremely buggy. We subjected each of the vendors to a battery of integrations, from simple to challenging, and it fell short on each one. One of the most simple integrations was grabbing a CSV file from an FTP source, parsing the data, doing a small amount of transformation, then inserting that data into an Azure MSSQL DB. After 2 hours on the phone with the Cast Iron support team, we were still unable to get this working.

Incentivized

Vertify offered more flexibility and was presented as a simple solution. In reality, it is more complex that we envisioned and we have never fully utilized our tools due to the lack of ability to configure things properly.

Incentivized

• I don't see any negative Impact .
• I like using this tool to do my job.
• I am comfortable using this tool.

Incentivized

• Independently, teams are able to carry out their process with less communication and at a higher level of accuracy.
• VertifyData is actively taking into consideration, consulting, and supporting our plans to build out the business