IFTTT is a marketing automation software solution offered by IFTTT. It is scaled for non-technical
users and less complex, generally two-step connectors and API’s.
N/A
webMethods.io Integration
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
webMethods.io Integration (formerly webMethods Integration Cloud) from Software AG is designed to make it easy to connect SaaS apps and make business processes more efficient. It enables enterprise subject matter experts and eliminates integration silos, allowing users to integrate applications hosted in public or private clouds, as well as applications hosted on premises.
Because of the multitude of options with IFTTT, it is hard to describe the best use scenarios, but I will share how I use the platform at this time. I use IFTTT to check Craigslist for certain IT equipment postings and email me if that occurs, turning items on and off with geo-fencing and WiFi network presence, and linking my calendar to my to-do list
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.
IFTTT manages a number of social media accounts quite well. Being able to login to one platform with access to all your accounts is great.
IFTTT is easy to set up. IFTTT has a number of crowd sourced and created formulas that you can use, or if you're looking for something specific you can create your own. This allows for an endless number of combinations and ways to engage with the program.
IFTTT doesn't require constant upkeep. Once you have things setup you can forget about it and it just works.
The website section "Activity" tends to get very crowded over time. It would benefit from some search and filter functionalities.
Some services lack ingredients. "Ingredients" are attributes passed from one service to another to enhance IFTTT's power. However, some services (like Evernote's notes, for example) currently have too few ingredients available.
It is not possible to link more than two services. It would be great, for example, to have an option to take a mail message and post in multiple social networks and blogs with the same applet.
There is no better alternative and although Integromat is new and the GUI is slick, they make you pay per push and IFTTT does not. The rest of the competition make you pay per integration or are just not as seamless in usage or have the depth of catalogue. If you use Zapier for instance, it is because they have an integration you have to use, not because Zapier does a better job.
For the most part, IFTTT is great but it does have its limitations. You may only do one thing at a time. If you want branching logic it can be cumbersome and clunky. This it where something like Microsoft Flow does better. For simplicity, nothing can beat IFTTT for how easy it is to set up and use right out of the box
I have had a few issues with apps over the years. Compared to other services, ITFFF is the best choice but no service is perfect unless you build it yourself for yourself. ITFFF needs more tutorials on how to create a custom platform, but overall I will recommend it as an easy to use, time-saving service.
I haven't used Zapier extensively, but it seems that IFTTT is much simpler to set up. However, Zapier appears to be a much deeper integration where you can sync a variety of fields of data and customize the sync more than you can with IFTTT. Zapier may be more valuable for someone with a complex need and IFTTT is built for simple solutions for more basic apps.
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.
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
