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
Rally Software
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Rally Software headquartered in Boulder, Colorado developed the Rally agile software development / ALM platform which was acquired by CA Technologies and rebranded as CA Agile Central. After CA's acquisition by Broadcom the software was once again rebranded as Rally.
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.
Rally Software is well suited for large Agile or scrum teams who do sprints and it helps managing sprints and backlogs. It is well suited for organizations who want visibility into work being done and progress. Suitable for tracking is user stories, defects and release planning. Works well with CI CD too. It would not be suitable for small teams or startups. For teams that don't use agile. Teams who want lightweight tools like Jira. Companies with a limited budget.
There are dashboards that provide friendly and useful metrics at the team, program and portfolio levels which help get an easy and quick visual representation of what's going on.
Story management made easier, It offers a quick way of quickly entering a number of user stories without losing the overview, by just typing the title and selecting a few attributes directly in the overview screen.
Sprint management is seamless in CA Agile Central . It allows you to drag stories from the backlog to the sprints and back again. When a story is dragged into an sprint, it automatically checks the velocity for that sprint and indicates how many more story points can be chipped in. No more manual checking needed by scrum master with respect to allocation and team velocity.
Though CA Agile Central has many inbuilt apps, but it also has an App-SDK that allows you to build free app extensions using JavaScript and HTML. So, as per their needs, teams can customize & build various apps & dashboards.
Dashboard is an awesome feature which allows you to select and drag panels with all kinds of graphical information about the current sprints and releases.
It offers tremendous support for scaled Agile & almost all scaling frameworks are supported specifically tuned to SAFe .
CA Agile Central includes several applications but it also integrates well with Jira, Confluence, Jenkins, Eclipse, Subversion, IBM, HP, Salesforce.com and many other products to allow users to organize projects to their specifications. So you can still use Jira at a team level & CA Agile Central at the program & portfolio level for efficient tracking & management.
The custom tags are very helpful in segregating the user stories based on the project needs. Even though it's a very small feature, it is very effective ( you will realize why specifically if you are using Jira).
CA Central Agile enables agile delivery with ease and provides comprehensive features to track time-boxes, Work In Progress items of the forecast increments.
Backlog management is hassle free since you can either drag and drop your user stories to the desired position on the backlog, or change a setting and manually enter priorities as a number.
User management is pretty basic and could be better. For example more filters and reports and more ability to do mass updates.
The report generator is very, very basic and is not WYSIWYG. It has limited filters to generate reports. Often a Scrum master will need to export data to Excel or a tool like Crystal Reports to get enhanced reporting capability.
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.
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.
Great UI, recent refresh was terrific. Great graphs and metrics, inline editing for updates, and a multitude of views on sprint progress make for a great team collaboration experience. There is also an active community and forums so that if you do need help, it is readily available
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.
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
The screens render relatively quickly but many actions that you would expect to require a single click require multiple clicks and pop-up windows. The extra windows and clicks make the product feel ponderous.
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.
I've had to use support only one time and my issue was eventually resolved but not because of my ticket--because others complained about the functionality taken away so they brought it back. My ticket was never answered or addressed. So I can't really say much for the support factor for Rally.
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.
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
It more or less confirmed that we are using it the way they had in mind. We were hoping for a epiphany in terms of how we could use it better.
They also want to be a go to source for agile processes and have an online resource center. It’s not that great but had a couple of nuggets. It hasn’t really helped us too much and we are not too far off from the classical interpretation of agile.
I would recommend training, in particular for organizations that multiple on-going projects. The product seems optimized for larger, more complex teams and getting proper training on how to configure, administer and use the system would be beneficial
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.
Implementation of RALLY services and program satisfaction among various group,... 1) Dev Outcomes: How were our resiliencies, development, learning & practitioners “make them do the work,” but that they ask you to do it “in a way like before. 2) The Ops group: Just wish to make sure any change won't break current production envirements All the stake holders has to be on the same page
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.
Rally and Asana have comparable features and are both valuable project management tools, but Asana's user interface is well-organized and highly intuitive. It's easy to add tasks and collaborators, edit due dates, indicate progress on tasks, close out projects, etc. However, Rally's interface is somewhat cluttered and difficult to navigate. My team ended up choosing Asana over Rally due to these concerns.
it helped organizing many of the processes management use to communicate tasks with engineers, and provided detailed charts on the speed/blockage during any iteration
with time Rally became the main tool we used to track and report tasks/defects in our projects, but frequent service outages made it very hard to continue consider as a reliable solution
too much features is good, but for engineers a few features (User Stories section, iterations, defects, and Kanban boards) are necessary and the rest is just noise
