Discussions

News: webMethods announces Integration Platform combined with JBoss

  1. webMethods has announced the immediate availability of their webMethods Integration Platform which is now seamlessly integrated with the JBoss application server. The combination will definitley get JBoss into more larger account customers than in the past.

    webMethods is calling the the combined product the industries first 'fully functional' application development and process integration platform.

    Combining development and integration is an investment that BEA has also made in the now shipping Weblogic 8.1 platform. Oracle has also announced recently that it will take this direction in their 10G platform.

    Check out webMethod's J2EE page and the press release.
  2. This definitely will get jboss out there more. webMethods isn't cheap so you usually see it in the larger shops. If they don't have a license for an app server, and webMethods comes with one, they're going to be more likely to adopt it than if they had to go and find it themselves. My last full-time job, we used webMethods. We paid a godawful amount of money for it. But I couldn't get anyone to splurge on a J2EE server, which I could have used to host a number of different things that ended up as standalone java processes. If JBoss had come with webMethods, I'd have had no problem getting it running and no problem convincing management that it was OK to use. If it comes with something you paid a half a million dollars for, it can't be that bad, right?
  3. Would you have actually written EJBs, or could you have gotten by with Tomcat and Struts?

    Just trying to get a feel for what percentage of people are using EJBs these days, and not still just using Servlets, JSPs, etc.
  4. Last two projects I worked on we used EJBs. There was no need to use them.
  5. You need to realize when you are talking about integration broker solutions, you are talking about integrating distributed, loosely coupled, high volume, transaction, pure data driven integration. There is no UI component in many cases. E.G. I receive an EDI transaction from application one, I need to parse the EDI, extract data, make a business decision from that data, transform that EDI into CSV, load that CSV into another application, which in turn dumps an XML file, which I then again parse, execute business logic, then do an insert into an RDBMS. Oh and all of the above must be done in a single ACID transaction which itself could span 2 days......

    EJBs and their containers along with distributed tx support is the kind of infrastructure IB's need. I dont see how a few servlets is going to provide an IB with the kind of enterprise class runtime environment they need.

    Dave Wolf
  6. Servlets arent the salve of the world[ Go to top ]

    Finally, a reason for using for EJBs. :)
  7. The fact is that there is market demand in the user base of webm for component based computing. Some see the O/R mappers in EJB as a source of integration data. Getting the data in the middleware layer is what we do, moving and massaging it around is what they do. Also there seems to be an uptake of people wanting to model flow in components.

    Being an old SAP guy and that having been my introduction to EJB (modeling SAP objects as EJB's) I know the pro-cons of the approach. The pros is that custom extensions are simpler to make, in this case we avoid the cons which is pre=packaged business components.

    It is not just the fact that JBoss is sexy that drives this kind of adoption, most of the developers wouldn't care in the integration sphere. It is a real business need at the user level, that and the fact that we save a lot of money for a lot of people.
  8. JBoss JMS Implementation Stinks[ Go to top ]

    It would be nice if you were able to take WebMethods JMS implementation or at least provide a low cost of their implementation for JBoss.

    The JBoss implementation of JMS stinks.
  9. If someone is going to fork out big bucks for a presumably state-of-the-art integration solution, then why would they settle for JBOSS?

    Also, if they realize the benefits of combining development and integration in the same solution, then why not go with WebLogic Integration 8.1 and have a more standard, open, easy-to-use, robust, and manageable solution that is one product and not an afterthought?

    Matt
  10. If someone is going to fork out big bucks for a presumably state-of-the-art integration solution, then why would they settle for JBOSS?

    >
    > Also, if they realize the benefits of combining development and integration in the same solution, then why not go with WebLogic Integration 8.1 and have a more standard, open, easy-to-use, robust, and manageable solution that is one product and not an afterthought?
    >
    > Matt

    He he, you're funny Matt. Is that what you tell your sales people?
    Bill
  11. If someone is going to fork out big bucks for a presumably state-of-the-art integration solution, then why would they settle for JBOSS?

    >

    Yes, if you've already paid a half million for integration, why not spend another 1/2 million on BEA licenses? Yes, sign me up Matt. Please, sign me up.

    Bill
  12. Responding to FUD[ Go to top ]

    "then why not go with WebLogic Integration 8.1 and have a more standard, open, easy-to-use, robust, and manageable solution that is one product and not an afterthought? "

    WebLogic Integration 8.1 is not a standard. No integration product is a standard.

    WebMethods adheres to the same standards that Integration 8.1 adheres to (JMS, SOAP, XML, etc).

    Come on, let's cut the crap.
  13. These guys must be watching too many old movies. Even IBM has only had marginal success with combining a washed up legacy product with an uninspiring open source product and trying to sell it as seamless integration.
    (and this from an integration company!)

    "Witness the power of this fully armed and operational battle station..."
    the Emperor just before the battle station is destroyed...

    Matt
  14. sounds like - return of the jedi-[ Go to top ]

    These guys must be watching too many old movies. Even IBM has only had marginal success with combining a washed up legacy product with an uninspiring open source product and trying to sell it as seamless integration.

    > (and this from an integration company!)
    >
    > "Witness the power of this fully armed and operational battle station..."
    > the Emperor just before the battle station is destroyed...
    >
    > Matt

    Man, if Linux and Eclipse are uninspiring Matt, then I'd like to know what you do for fun and excitement.

    You crack me up.

    Bill