Likelihood to Recommend If you need to have complex options in place you can count on Weblogic to be a robust Applicational Server you can rely on. But you would need to keep an eye on maintaining the framework updated quite frequently to avoid security breaches and subsequent severe situations. If you don't have other infrastructure for test purposes, I wouldn't advise you on having devs and QA installing this heavy application in their local machines, there are other lightweight solutions that would be a better fit for that.
Read full review 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 Pros The brand relation between Java and WebLogic Application Server usually provides a quicker access to programming features and their availability for the applications deployed. The access to centralized configuration both from console and command line WLST eases the implementation of changes major or not in an organized and expedite way. The maturity of the product is also visible in the available tools provided by the product itself, for both monitoring of resources and alerting for availability and thresholds Read full review Easy to use Priced competitively Supports robust and resilient integration solutions Read full review Cons The Admin UI should be further simplified, the UI design was not too user-friendly— too many options and clicks required, difficult for the new beginners to figure out what they are looking for. The admin server becomes the single failure point, although Oracle suggested some workarounds by setting VIP and VHost, it was not quite easy and straight forward. Domain replication is hard, requiring a lot of knowledge and scripts efforts. Admin will hang if the node manager communication encounters some issues for one or some nodes in the domain/cluster. Not able to kill/terminate the stuck thread, the only way is to restart the managed server (JVM) License cost is too high, for small businesses. Read full review 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 Usability I would have given it a 10 but sometimes the hogging threads become a issue and needs server bounce. Except that, we are very pleased with the product.
Read full review Performance Oracle WebLogic Application Server is great at security, performance and features.
Read full review Support Rating The Oracle support is not great sometimes. They take a long time and need a lot of data over and over to resolve issues.
Read full review Alternatives Considered I believe the Oracle WebLogic Suite is probably a better all encompassing suite of development tools for the IT department. [It] is probably a bit more expensive than other competitors like
Apache Tomcat or
NGINX , but is worth the investment if you consider the savings from time to get code into production.
Read full review 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 Return on Investment WebLogic Application Server definitely had a positive ROI since all the applications are deployed on a single platform and making maintenance extremely cost effective. Since all major cloud vendors support and maintain WebLogic, it gives us an opportunity to explore possibilities to move the organizational infrastructure on to the cloud without too much effort. Sirish Vadala Applications Developer Information Technology Specialist
Read full review 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 ScreenShots