Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) Reviews

My main use case for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is as an application server, and sometimes I have used it as a web server on a few servers as well. It provides great middleware technology to use as an application server and compensates for all my application requirements.

A specific example of where I used Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) as an application server is for my in-house applications that mainly utilize JBoss or WildFly, which is the new name for JBoss. I am using it for managing my applications and, as mentioned, also using it as a web server, so it helps in communicating and integrating with the database. I have used many applications currently with the help of just the JBoss application, and it is very easy to use. Until last year, I was using JBoss 7 version, and then I migrated to JBoss EAP 8 version, as the 7 version was at end of life.

I would say there are many advantages with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) compared to Oracle WebLogic, which I previously used. After starting to migrate my applications from Oracle WebLogic to JBoss EAP over the last three years, I find its main features to be very secure and highly compatible with other languages. There is nothing fancy I need to change in the code, and it starts working seamlessly. I can simply adjust XMS parameters on the fly, restart JBoss, and it performs very well.

The security features of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) have been beneficial for my team, as many applications use JBoss while also employing other languages such as Perl, PHP, and Java-based applications. Most of them are primarily Java-based applications, so Red Hat JBoss's compatibility mainly facilitated my migration. During the migration, it was very helpful because Red Hat provided a useful tool for it; I simply downloaded it from their website and ran the script. Before migrating, I backed up my configuration files, and after a restart of JBoss, everything worked very well, with only the need to update the ports.

I have already covered the features of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), such as security and compatibility with other languages. The clustering feature is very good, and I can easily add other plugins to connect with databases such as SQL or Oracle.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) positively impacts my organization by reducing the number of tickets I receive. When using other application servers, I faced many heap memory and security tickets, and those bugs generated a huge volume of logs that filled my application file systems, resulting in the application going down within a short time. Since I started using JBoss EAP, I have seen a significant reduction in both the number of tickets and logs. The support from Red Hat is very good; I normally do not have many tickets with them, but when I encounter issues or try new features, they are very helpful.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can be improved, as there are changes with the Java version, transitioning from Java to Jakarta since the last JBoss 8 version. I had to make several changes across my server to align with these updates, which was a challenging task for me as it took time. Additionally, in terms of security, there are still some concerns with hacking on Java versions and Java ports, and the XML libraries should be more secure, maintaining consistency to facilitate smoother migrations between versions.

My experience during migrations with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) was mainly smooth, but I encountered application-specific issues because some applications were not compatible with the new version. I had to roll back and troubleshoot these issues, reaching out to Red Hat for assistance, and they were instrumental in resolving those concerns.

I have been using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for three or more years.

In my experience, Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is approximately ninety percent stable. However, I sometimes encounter issues where deployment fails after restart or JBoss restarts itself due to heap memory issues or configuration changes within the application, leading me to conclude it is ninety percent stable.

The scalability of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) depends significantly on the application and the amount of memory and CPU cores provided on the server. For instance, as I utilize Red Hat EAP in my Azure cloud, I can easily scale based on server memory and CPU. If I notice potential issues, especially when running several instances of JBoss on a single server, I can increase the XMS parameters, restart the application, and it resumes functioning easily.

Customer support for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has been beneficial as I use a subscription-based model, which carries an associated cost for standard and premium support. For production servers, I have opted for premium support, which has proven to be very useful. For high-severity cases, I receive twenty-four-seven support, and usually, my tickets get responses within one hour with easy resolutions. Occasionally, tickets related to new or migrated applications may take one to two days, but overall, the support from Red Hat is excellent.

Before Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), I used Oracle WebLogic and IBM WebSphere on some servers, but they were not user-friendly or easy to work with. Therefore, I started employing Red Hat JBoss on my test servers, which turned out to be very simple for my application team and users, prompting my decision to adopt Red Hat.

I have observed a return on investment with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) since the time saved is directly related to the number of incidents that have decreased. I do not require as many personnel to manage all those issues now. Previously, I had to restart my application weekly, making it easier for me to set up those restarts, and there were no flaws requiring monitoring afterward to ensure functionality, which has significantly saved time.

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), I believe the licensing cost is somewhat higher. However, I expect this given that it is now under IBM.

I would say that the licensing cost for JBoss is higher compared to other middleware technologies, but I accept it since it is now part of Red Hat. The support provided by Red Hat is very helpful and easy to use. The pricing is based on my core deployment, with fewer cores for test versions and many cores for production ones. The subscription model is straightforward, and Azure has also been very supportive in the setup and cost reduction.

Prior to choosing Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), I evaluated alternatives such as IBM WebSphere and Oracle WebLogic. However, those options did not meet my needs adequately; they were not user-friendly, and my applications struggled with compatibility, so I did not pursue any other solutions.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is deployed in my organization on both on-premises and public cloud environments. Initially, I used it exclusively on-premises and later adopted it for public cloud use, so I currently utilize both.

On a rough estimate, when I was using different middleware technologies about three or four years ago, I dealt with around one hundred to one hundred twenty-five tickets per month for production servers. After using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) and enhancing the configuration files, the tickets have been reduced by half. The logs still exist, but they are now useful rather than just vague numbers filling the file systems; the logs have decreased and provide good information.

My advice for others considering Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is to ensure that if you are migrating applications from any other middleware technologies, you should only use the latest version. Opting for an older version heading towards end-of-life leads to costly support from Red Hat. Therefore, I recommend starting with test servers to ensure compatibility with your applications; if they do not work properly with Red Hat JBoss, then it is better not to proceed.

I rate Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) an eight out of ten because there are still some issues present; it is not perfect. I have encountered deployment failures, memory leaks, connection pooling exhaustion, and sometimes configuration issues with Red Hat. Thus, there remain opportunities for improvement.

The main use case for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is to deploy web applications, WAR files and JAR files of our developed app, and also to use Red Hat JBoss orchestrator for containerization and everything.

We primarily use Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for various environments such as dev, SIT, and prod, and we have been using it exclusively for SAP-based front-end while the back-end is Spring Boot, and we were using JBoss particularly for deploying these servers, with a very easy way to deploy the JAR files mainly.

The best features Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) offers are its integration into AWS services, which is very helpful in containerization and application of Kubernetes specifically, and its user interface is very easy to use; we can deploy WAR files within stipulated time and also schedule deployments at a particular time, and it is easy to run the pipelines and integrate it with Jenkins.

The most valuable feature for my team is containerization and Jenkins integration because Jenkins integration helps us eradicate code smells and build pipeline reports, and it also supports continuous CI/CD pipelining, while this orchestration aids in a microservice architecture where we will be using different types for it.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has positively impacted my organization by helping in quickly making web Spring Boot applications and Java-based applications, and it is very easy to adapt and learn, plus it is open source with nominal and affordable subscription plans.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can be improved by integrating different services related to Azure and AWS, and the open-source application and the EAP orchestrator Kubernetes platform must be more specifically usable for every user.

The support for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) could also be better than it is now.

I have been using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for about two and a half years.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is stable in my experience.

The scalability of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is pretty good, with minimum and maximum machines required being very efficient.

The customer support is pretty good, but they need to be quicker in resolving issues related to Red Hat JBoss.

Previously, we were using IBM's WebSphere Console, WAS console, which is famous, and we switched to Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) because it is open source and is easy to integrate on AWS platforms.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has saved a lot of time in rapid deployment of applications, and for an existing migration project which was stipulated for a timeline of six months, it just took around two and a half months, specifically 80 days, achieving the target of completing within three months, along with the payment subscription being very nominal and affordable.

The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was nominal, and with the right guidance, it could have saved a few more bucks.

We can say that if we are charging around 0.75 cents per hour for a virtual machine on AWS, then in the Red Hat JBoss orchestrator, charges have seen significant improvement at around 0.58 cents.

We evaluated a few other options, but as JBoss is an EAP service, we were more interested in it being open source.

I would rate Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) around seven to eight.

I would select seven because even though it has its advantages, it does lack some flexibility.

I would advise others looking into using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) to have a trial period of 90 days to see if it works for them before going for a yearly or three-year subscription, which will significantly reduce the pricing.

I think there is a partner-based relationship with JBoss, but I am not completely aware of it.

I would rate this product a seven overall.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is used to deploy web applications and web services, which is the primary purpose.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) connectors are particularly valuable for connecting to mainframe systems. Previously, a Bull mainframe was used, and connectors were available for that system. The platform is also used for databases and management of connection pools for these types of connectors, as well as for security and securing access. The ability to manage multiple instances on the same server with different ports is a significant capability.

Optimization has been used only once to optimize the Java runtime. Pool and connector adjustments are sometimes made to achieve optimum performance.

Microservices have been used for specific tasks, such as a microservice dedicated to signature functionality for PDF documents. The plan for the future is to migrate all applications and implement microservices during the next refactoring.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) connectors are particularly interesting and valuable for connecting to mainframe systems, including those previously used, as well as for databases and management of connection pool for these types of connectors. Security features and the ability to secure access, along with the possibility to manage multiple instances on the same server with different ports, are significant advantages.

The management console is used in a straightforward manner for online configuration, hot configuration, and deployment across different environments such as test environments. The console is used for deployment in testing and development. For production, deployment is handled online or through other tools such as Ansible for configuration automation.

Currently, Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has been working well with no performance-related problems. However, there is concern about how the platform will be used when the organization switches to microservices, and it is unclear whether Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) or only a lighter container will be used. No decisions have been made yet, but preparation for this migration is beginning.

Making Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) work in a containerized environment, such as Nutanix or other container platforms, is a potential solution, although there has not been sufficient time to test it.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has been used since 2008 until now.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is very stable. Problems with Java runtime memory have been experienced occasionally.

Red Hat support has not been contacted for this product in a long time. The last support request was more than seven years ago and was related to memory or Java performance with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP).

Return on investment with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has not been measured. Other types of measurements are in place, but they are not related to the resources used. The resources used and the gains from those resources have not been correlated.

Scalability depends on the application type. For stateless applications, there is no problem scaling horizontally, and multiple instances of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can be deployed. However, there are sometimes limitations in the possibilities available.

Red Hat support has not been contacted for this product in a long time. The last support request was more than seven years ago and was related to memory or Java performance with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP).

Before Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), other products were used for deploying applications, though it is uncertain if they still function. WebLogic, Jonas, and an open-source Apache option were used, though the specific name of the Apache product is not remembered.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) was selected in 2008 when the organization switched from Jonas. Since then, no problems have been experienced, and the platform has supported applications that require 24/7 availability and millions of transactions per second. It has performed well, and it has not been changed until now. The next move to containers is something that must be tested and compared between available projects.

The installation of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is straightforward and not a problem. It can also be installed with other tools such as Ansible or Terraform.

The price of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) varies. A request for proposals is made each time, and two or three offers are received before one is selected. The offer includes not only the product but also configuration, deployment, and multiple other services.

No other solutions were discussed as alternates to Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP).

Microservices have been used for specific tasks, such as a microservice dedicated to signature functionality for PDF documents. The plan for the future is to migrate all applications and implement microservices during the next refactoring.

Other products have been used for deploying applications, though it is uncertain if they still function. WebLogic, Jonas, and an open-source Apache option were used, though the specific name of the Apache product is not remembered.

When comparing Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) to WebLogic and other products, particularly open-source products, there are no significant differences observed.

Docker is being used with Red Hat, which shares the same Linux core.

Work is being done with different products. Currently, only simple framework open-source solutions such as Docker or Kubernetes are used, but only for small projects.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is only deployed on-premises. Cloud deployment has only been tested for personal purposes on AWS.

The enterprise works primarily with Microsoft, and no services have been purchased from the AWS Marketplace.

This review has been given a rating of eight out of ten.

I am working with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), which is an application server used by Red Hat, but it is not used too much in RBC. It is a low-level application server in the same class as WebSphere or WebLogic, and Tomcat is the same, but it is a low-level application server and not a high-end, super professional one.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is very easy to use. I would say that even a high school individual can become accustomed to Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP). It does not take too much to learn, so the learning curve is not steep.

Regarding support and better documentation or customization, I like what I have seen. However, I saw some areas of improvement in the documentation. From a support point of view, whatever support we get from IBM for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) and for Red Hat, we are fine. We are a bank, and there are very specific agreements to have this support. I do not want to say 24 hours, seven days, but we need it right away. So nobody is fooling around at this level because we are a bank.

I have dealt with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for around 10 years.

I think Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is stable.

I find it easy to stretch it out or shrink it regarding scalability; it is manageable.

I do not think it is expensive to have this, but I suppose the bank is paying a lot for maintenance and for customer support. Because if we have issues, we get a timely answer, and if you want a timely answer, you have to pay some premium.

Positive

I suppose if you are a small customer, things are seen from another angle regarding pricing.

I cannot answer regarding areas that Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can improve because I do not have an answer.

As for satisfaction with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP), I am speaking from satisfaction, not from high availability because you cannot compare Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) with WebSphere, for example, or with WebLogic, but from a peace of mind, it is fine. My overall review rating for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is eight.

My main use case for JBoss is the administration of the application mostly.

My use case implies installation, configuration, and setting JBoss EAP on different systems such as Linux, Windows and configuring the standalone or domain. This implies working with the web console, automation tools, and CLI. Additionally, it involves securing it, implementing authentication, RBAC or Role-Based Access Control, SSL, TLS, and so on. Performance tuning, thread pool management, logging, and clustering are mostly what I have done with the product.

JBoss has positively impacted my organization by enabling deployment with enterprise extensions that were needed, particularly for integration with directory services. The difference came in implementation, and it offers a significant role in deployment that is scalable, especially when using a clustering way of working with it.

Specific outcomes include improved deployment times due to modular architecture leveraging lazy loading, which affects the time taken to deploy archive, war, or ear files, and the deployment success rate without server restarts. This impact has significantly enhanced stability and reduced downtime. Lower memory consumption during deployment has been apparent thanks to subsystem isolation, while asynchronous deployment handling has reduced spikes and led to fewer errors with better validation overlay support in cases of failed deployments or rollback events. Additionally, I have enabled quick fixes without full redeployments, particularly with frequent overlay-based updates.

In my experience, the best features JBoss offers include the modular architecture where the services are loaded when needed, and the cross-platform compatibility that allows it to run on any operating system that supports Java. The high availability and clustering, distributed support, session replication, and load balancing using Infinispan stand out. The security enhancement such as native support of OpenID Connect or JAS for flexible authentication is another outstanding feature. Others include flexible deployment modes and control of session affinity, which is fine-tune control over load balancer stickiness strategies for managing web sessions. Furthermore, global directory support allows for easily adding shared modules to deployments without class path. It stands out because it is a full-stack platform for building today's cloud-ready Java applications that are scalable and secure, blending enterprise-grade features with open-source flexibility. It is the top choice for organizations that need reliability today.

For underrated features, server group in domain mode allows grouping servers and applying configuration or deployments across them simultaneously. Not many people know about the CLI scripting with batch mode or Vault and Credential stores, where sensitive configuration values can be stored without hardcoding them into XML files. Additionally, built-in metrics and subsystem isolation, where every subsystem logging, messaging, or web services can be tuned independently, provide fine-grained control over performance and behavior. This is why subsystem isolation is important, and many administrators have not utilized it that way.

JBoss can be improved significantly, especially regarding deployment overlays that need updates to apply quick fixes or environment-specific changes without redirecting the archive. Enhancements in CLI scripting for automatic deployments or rollbacks and having an automated way of updating in the future for pack changes and version transitions are critical. More details about the update progress of package installations, artifacts downloading, as well as automation for modules and configurations applied are needed. Additionally, features for drifting and reverting would be worthwhile. We leverage domain mode with server groups to enforce synchronized rollout strategies across clusters without downtime or config drift.
Subsystem isolation doesn’t just reduce memory usage it allows us to apply GC tuning and diagnostic tracing at the service level, not the container level.
Our CLI scripting has been backed by pre-validated batch execution pipelines, eliminating human error during hotfix rollouts and version transitions.
Using overlays in conjunction with marker files, we've created an audit-friendly patching workflow that doesn't require full archive redeployments.
Changes in the future need to align with today's directions regarding the most evolutionary topics of Jakarta EE progression. As Jakarta EE progresses, newer specifications such as Jakarta Data and Jakarta NoSQL or AI-assisted diagnostics are necessary.
We’ve integrated JBoss metrics output with Prometheus exporters, enabling real-time subsystem-level observability and predictive scaling alerts.
By aligning with Jakarta EE's modular progression, we've positioned our stack to adopt emerging specs like Jakarta NoSQL without disruptive upgrades.
JBoss’s flexible threading model allowed us to apply workload-specific executor policies, preventing starvation in high-concurrency deployments.
More straightforward updates and rollbacks need to be done with the CLI, alongside improved observability, such as native support for OpenTelemetry or enhanced DevOps tools with command-line interfaces and automation features. Support for YAML-based configuration is crucial, especially in a GitOps deployment style, along with cloud-native enhancements such as integration with Kubernetes, OpenShift, or newer technologies.
I would like to see JBoss reassess its executor configuration controls and consider offering default workload profiles such as I/O-bound, CPU-heavy, or async-first—to optimize threading strategies out of the box.
On the cloud-native side, it’s important to validate container readiness and expand operator-driven automation for Kubernetes, especially focusing on CRD evolution and stateless rollout support. I would also recommend improving workflow transparency by providing clearer feedback during pack updates, including artifact download status, config sync logs, and rollback outcome visibility.

I have been using JBoss for more than 10 years.

JBoss has remained reliable and fully functional across workloads, and I haven’t encountered any critical failures that would impact operations—especially when compared to prior solutions like Oracle WebLogic. Its resilience continues to make it a dependable backbone for enterprise middleware needs.

JBoss's scalability is effective. Its architecture is elastic, meaning it can handle growing workloads smoothly, whether it's scaling up for high demand or scaling out across clustered nodes. This elasticity makes it ideal for dynamic environments where resource usage can vary.

With newer Java versions, memory management has become noticeably more efficient. Improvements in garbage collection and memory recovery mean the platform performs well under load, with less risk of memory leaks or bottlenecks. This leads to better application stability and faster response times, especially during peak usage.

I would describe the experience as reliable and professional especially valuable when you're running JBoss in production and uptime matters. My experience with JBoss customer service and support has been dependable overall.  When using the Red Hat-supported version, the service team was responsive and knowledgeable.  For issues involving configuration, security realms, or integration quirks, I usually received clear guidance and practical solutions. The response time was more reasonable than questionable and in most cases, the support escalated technical problems efficiently when needed.
That said, for more complex or niche setup scenarios, I sometimes had to dig through documentation or lean on community channels like forums or GitHub discussions.
The support is solid, but having technical familiarity helps speed things along.

Positive

Before JBoss, I used Oracle WebLogic. I switched primarily because Oracle changed their solution's availability as well as the way they handled licenses, which became unfriendly for customers, leading to extensive discussions regarding licensing costs. Therefore, the most crucial factor for switching was the company direction of Oracle.

When using JBoss in standalone mode, installation is quick and simple you can get it running with minimal effort, especially for development or testing. It’s also great that it works on any operating system that supports Java and compatibility isn’t usually an issue. However, things can get more complex when you start configuring domain mode, especially if you’re setting up host controllers, managing server groups, or trying to centralize control across multiple servers. Integrating with other services by setting up LDAP for authentication or configuring secure connections it requires more time and planning. Once preparing it for production use, tuning the JVM, thread pools, logging levels or isolating subsystems requires deeper understanding. Support-wise, JBoss offers a lot of documentation, but beginners might find it a bit hard to follow at first.
The community is active and helpful, especially on Red Hat channels, but solving specific issues sometimes means a bit of experimentation.
if you're planning to use JBoss seriously, make sure you invest time in learning the architecture, automate where possible using command-line scripts and start monitoring from the first implementation day. Those choices can make the difference between a smooth experience and a frustrating one.

We implemented JBoss using our in-house team. Our engineers were already familiar with Java-based middleware and deployment strategies, we didn’t need to rely on an external vendor. That gave us more control over the setup process, especially around automation, performance tuning, and integration with existing services. It also saved us from additional consulting costs and helped us tailor the implementation to fit our environment exactly as needed.

We’ve seen a marked reduction in downtime and a major boost in system stability, resulting in fewer outages. One of the biggest wins has been the cost savings especially compared to Oracle WebLogic thanks to JBoss’s more affordable licensing model, particularly when bundled with Red Hat or OpenShift.

Its scalable design, whether deployed as a standalone system, clustered setup or through modular subsystems, JBoss has allowed us to tailor infrastructure to match demand. Using deployment overlays and scripting, we've sped up rollouts and maintained performance through smart JVM tuning.

Overall, we calculated a payback period of just around 5 months and a few days which speaks volumes and it’s been a strategic move with clear financial benefits.

My advice is to carefully review the licensing options before setting up JBoss. While using the free version WildFly, most companies go for the paid Red Hat JBoss version, which comes with extra features and support. The setup itself isn’t expensive, but getting it right often involves extra costs for team training, automation setup and performance tuning. For could environments loke OpenShift or Kubernetes it is important to make sure your licensing covers that so you don’t run into surprises later.
It’s smart to plan ahead and look beyond the software cost your return on investment will likely come from less downtime, smoother deployments and better scalability.

Before choosing JBoss, I evaluated other options, but the only one that adequately covered all needed aspects from different customers was Oracle WebLogic.

My advice for others looking into using JBoss is to understand the architecture before deploying and to differentiate between standalone and domain mode. Automating early and using command-line based scripts is essential. Monitoring everything, tuning JVM and thread pools, and using deployment overlays for quick fixes to minimize downtime through patches is crucial as well. Careful planning regarding licensing is the most important factor for customers.

It is crucial to invest time into learning the security standards for authentication and encryption in JBoss. This flexibility offers more than legacy JS solutions.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate JBoss an 8 out of 10.

My main use case for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is the deployment of our specific applications.

A specific example of an application I have deployed using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is some application pages about educational support from the government that stands out.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) fits into that process by helping with scalability, which is the most important factor because the product gives me scalability opportunities, such as G-group or load balance or other options.

The best feature Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) offers is G-group.

When I mention G-group, I am referring to clustering or grouping servers for high availability, which ensures that our application can support load balance and maximum uptime.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has positively impacted my organization by minimizing the downtime of applications, which gives me respect from users.

With time, we get results showing how much downtime was reduced. Clustering is the main standout feature for me.

I think documentation may need improvement for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP).

Additionally, the support feature can be improved.

I have been using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for five years.

I previously used Apache before Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP).

I gave this review an overall rating of eight.

We are currently using Ansible for Jira installations and all the management tasks. We perform some tasks manually, however, Ansible helps in automating some of these processes.

I find JBoss to be lightweight and easier to manage compared to WebSphere. It allows for simple modification of applications and provides better clustering capabilities. The setup was straightforward and suitable for enterprise-level needs.

I would like to see improved booting of applications altogether on one page to manage all data instances from one location, similar to an AWS console. 

Additionally, access and sessions could be improved in the scalable device.

I have used the solution for over three years.

I would rate the stability around eight out of ten. It is quite stable for our needs.

Scalability is a concern because it is not online, which limits online processes. This aspect can be improved.

Red Hat support is good. We receive support from RDS and Red Hat, and the response time and quality meet our expectations.

Positive

There are no competitors. WebSphere is still there, and we also use it alongside JBoss.

The setup was simple.

The price is somewhat high for an enterprise, however, it depends on organizational negotiations. Additionally, Red Hat support can be costly.

I evaluated WebSphere.

Overall, I would rate the solution around seven out of ten. Despite some concerns, I would still recommend it.

My main use case for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is for a web application for any customers we have on my main apps.

A specific example of how I use Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) with my web application for my customers is that I customize a payment link. We call it on other platforms, and we can process the monthly payment.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) offers excellent features, and it is very intuitive.

The particular feature of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) that I find especially useful is the main console, which is very flexible and easy to use.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has impacted my organization positively because it is a powerful platform and we can develop powerful applications very quickly.

An example of how being able to deploy powerful applications quickly has helped my organization is that for the most recent deployment, we were able to deploy this application in three weeks, which is very fast for us.

I cannot speak to how Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can be improved.

I have been using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for four or five years.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is a very stable platform in my experience.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is very fast and very strong in terms of scalability.

I have had one or two experiences with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) support team, and I found them very good.

I find this interview to be very good. The process is very easy and quick, and it is more comfortable overall. I would rate this product a 10.

Our product is agnostic, so we have been using JBoss as our default app server. We have been using it for over ten years.

JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries. This is crucial as the lifecycle of these technologies is short, and staying up to date is essential to avoid issues.

They are trying to make it less heavyweight since app servers often deliver a lot of functionality. Still, if we aren't leveraging them, they can be too much for certain use cases. Making it lighter and more modular would probably be beneficial.

We have been using JBoss for over ten years.

I haven't dealt with their support or customer service. Some of our clients have bought support, but I haven't heard anything about its quality, so I cannot comment.

Positive

We deploy on app servers chosen by clients, including WebSphere and WebLogic, which are more expensive.

JBoss has a very easy way of setting up. We use it since it doesn't cause a lot of issues.

We just use JBoss and sometimes buy support for certain things. We are not affiliated with any vendors.

Having automation around JBoss is very beneficial. It allows for quick deployment and rolling out new applications easily. This flexibility translates to a lower total cost of ownership.

JBoss is the cheaper option out of the three when compared to WebSphere and WebLogic. Though I haven't done a detailed price comparison, the licensing fee is cheaper, and due to its flexibility, the maintenance is easier and cheaper.

We also considered WebSphere and WebLogic.

JBoss is definitely a flexible option and achieves what other app servers do but with more ease and support of new technologies. 

I rate JBoss nine out of ten.

I use it for Java server applications.

I work on an output management system. There are products that use JBoss as the Java server. It's a product from another vendor called the 'M' series. They use JBoss as the server behind it.

It's good. You choose JBoss when you need a Java server. The benefit is that it's fast, reliable, and well-established.

It was the choice of the customer, and they have no issues so far. It's a very well established product.

The price could be improved. Customers don't want to buy the license easily. It's nice that there is Wildfly, which is basically the same as JBoss, just without the price.

I have experience with JBoss because we just had it in a project.

The stability is good. I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

The end users are around 300 for this application. It is used on a daily basis. 

In general, I would prefer Wildfly. If I want a free version, I would go for WildFly.

And the support is also a factor. If you can do it on your own, you take Wildfly. If you need support, you can take JBoss.

It might be yearly. I am not sure.

In the past we evaluated IBM WebSphere, Oracle, and Tomcat. WebSphere system is a pain. Oracle is way overpriced, though. That's my opinion.

JBoss's performance is on par with its competitors.  

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. If other users need support, I would recommend JBoss. If they don't, they should just go with WildFly.

JBoss is a state-of-the-art Java server with a difficult support package. If you want to do a Java application, JBoss is usually a very good choice.