Still, correct me if I am wrong, but the Actional tools are focused on managing the interaction with external parties (external to the app). Yes, it’s not just SOAP, but it is centered on what the app communicates, not what it does internally (e.g. JVM metrics, OS metrics, traces, logs…). Correct?

That was really the core of my question, how much value is derived from the “I/O” view of an app versus a more comprehensive management approach.

Thanks for the kind post. I’m a Progress employee, and the Actional Product Evangelist. As such, I’ve been involved with Mindreef since 2003 and when we first started partnering with them.

I wanted to point out one thing. Your comment about “SOAP being only one component of the integration landscape” is very true.

I wanted to clarify your comment relative to the two Progress products you’re talking about. While Mindreef is a SOAP-centric tool, Actional is NOT. In particular, on Oracle Application Server we support SOAP, JDBC, JMS, and HTTP servlets. On WebLogic Server we support various flavors of SOAP, JDBC, JMS, HTTP servlets, as well as EJB, RMI, and the Jakarta HTTP stack. It’s quite important for users to have the end-to-end view, both from the perspective of where messages are going, and the protocols they travel over.

I’m sorry if this is a bit “pitchy,” I didn’t mean it to be so. Stay tuned for the announcement of our Mindreef strategy on the 14th of July.

David