|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Mercator vs. BizTalk
Dean,
I think I'll have to pass on elaborating, for two reasons.
First and least important, that kind of information is the
information for which we get paid. Second and more
importantly, if we get into specifics everyone will have an
opinion and we'll be in a flame war.
Lawrence posted:
>If you are comparing BizTalk to anything, I would urge you
to use the
>lattter. We just went through a thorough test at our
office and BizTalk
>failed spectacularly, coming in the lowest of all the
products reviewed. We
>concluded BizTalk to be in the "design concept" stage, not
even beta. Maybe
>in a couple of more years ....
>
><snip>
My feeling is the fact that a software package failed to
perform in an environment such as the thorough test at
Lawrence's company in no way indicates that the same package
would not perform well under other circumstances where the
requirements differ, whether that product be CommerceBroker,
BizTalk, iPlanet, or any other. I raised a flag on
CommerceBroker because of past difficulties; Lawrence waves
a flag here on BizTalk. I won't urge you to not use the
Mercator product, though, because it might be a perfect fit
for your requirements. I'm not aware of any product which
is so bad that it fails completely.
Whether or not a product comes in at the top or bottom of
the rating for a company's needs depends on what those needs
are as much as on its abilities. A company simply must
develop a thorough business plan and business requirements
before trying to select software. Any discussion of
software capabilities outside the scope of meeting defined
requirements can be misleading. We would not eliminate a
package as being the best choice for a particular company
even though our experiences with that package were not the
best -- we will let the business requirements dictate the
choice.
Similarly, the evaluation of a package should not be done
using folks who are not experienced with the package. Time
and again we encounter companies who are not satisfied with
a product which should meet their needs, but which was
deployed by their internal staff who had little or no
familiarity with the product. Nobody wants to pay for
integration services when they can muck it up themselves.
[That said, there's no guarantee that the vendor's
integration services people won't muck it up either. :) ]
Requirements and a complementing solution design are the
key.
Jim
>Mani, Jim,
>
>Could one or both of you maybe elaborate a bit on the
shortcomings.
>As a long-time Mercator mapper/lover (at the
desktop/authoring level--never
>on Commerce Broker), it's disappointing to hear about
shortcomings...
>You don't need to flame, just inform...
>
>Dean
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
