+1 619 822 1745 [email protected]

Overall Rating

User Comments

Corepoint

  • “Relatively easy learning curve to get productive with the engine. The documentation is heads and tails above anything else I’ve seen. And their customer support is the bar all other should aspire to. They are excellent, eager to help and follow-up to ensure your questions or issues are resolved to your satisfaction.”
  • “Initial FTP functionally was lacking in support for large file delivery, but that has now been addressed with the newer version.”
  • “Corepoint fully met my top requirements that included excellent vendor support, ease of use configuration and management, and high availability operational workflow.”

Cloverleaf

  • “Cloverleaf is the best engine on the market.”
  • “It really is the best interface engine I’ve ever worked with.”
  • “Complexity and flexibility over simplicity. This is my favorite engine.”
  • “Cloverleaf is the best engine on the market. Most comprehensive and stable.”

Ensemble

  • “For a simple interface engine, I would choose Cloverleaf. As a product suite, the Intersystems packaging with Healthshare and Ensemble, its hard to beat the ease of implementing say an HIE. As far as companies that need just an interface engine, I would choose either Cloverleaf or Mirth.”
  • “Based on the capabilities and costs, Ensemble is a very reliable tool for the daily work that is needed in our integration space, however the costs and availability to open source tools as well as the move to web based integration would make it more difficult to justify the cost of Ensemble.”
  • “Excellent engine, very scalable.”

Mirth

  • “Mirth open source version fits our needs perfectly because we have a dev team able to adapt to it and develop the missing features. Best rapport, quality, and price for our use.”
  • “The cost is free and the tool is easy to use. However, it is not as manageable on a large scale such as Rhapsody. We would use this again.”
  • “The cost is low and engine is flexible. You need good developers to max out the engine capabilities. I would still choose this interface engine over others if I had to make a decision today.”

Rhapsody

  • “I’ve worked with 7 interface engines, and Rhapsody is by far my favorite. Orion is not my favorite company to work with, but the application itself is well developed and offers everything we’ve needed for integration.”
  • “I would choose a different engine. The application is easy to learn and a positive aspect is that you are able to see the entire JAVA coding when you map. The negative aspect of that is that you have to touch and adjust the code even with some of the simplest drag and drop mapping.”
  • “Good product for a core integration engine. Not that great on the support or partnership fronts.”
  • “We would choose this product again. Through Javascript programming you can do whatever you want with this product, and get as complicated as you want. Or you can stick to the canned widgets.”
Compare All Ratings in Survey Summary

Corepoint

B+

Ensemble

B

Cloverleaf

B–

Rhapsody

C+

Mirth

Ratings

Meeting Needs Features & Usability Additional Features Implementation Setup Stability & Scalability Support & Services Total Cost of Ownership Vendor Vs. Partner
Overall Rating