IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Apache Web Server vs IBM BPM comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Apache Logo
3,868 views|2,491 comparisons
IBM Logo
14,730 views|11,790 comparisons
Featured Review
Buyer's Guide
Application Infrastructure
July 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, F5, Microsoft and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: July 2022.
622,645 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution offers good security."

More Apache Web Server Pros →

"The performance is fine.""IBM BPM is a stable solution.""Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly.""The solution has helped us automate business processes.""This tool is very useful when it comes to enterprise-grade automation and governmental processes for the security aspects, performance, and reliability.""This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement.""Some of the features that I like the most are team management and process performance. They are both very useful and very powerful with regard to the workflow.""Overall, I'm satisfied with the product. If you compare it with other products, it's probably not as easygoing or as simple to implement as the rest. But after you get used to it, it works. It has a lot of capabilities and potential, but the people, who come from different technologies, have some difficulty getting used to the way of working with IBM products."

More IBM BPM Pros →

Cons
"Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."

More Apache Web Server Cons →

"The coaches and the user interface are the areas that can be improved a lot. It is good in terms of data processing, but the UI, scripting, and coaches are not very user-friendly and developer-friendly. Performance is always an issue. The scripting and the pattern that it uses are very tedious for new developers to understand, and it takes time to master it in depth. When comparing IBM BPM with IBM APN, a lot of things are provided out of the box in IBM APN. We don't have to write code or a Java connector to make a functionality work. It would be very helpful and time-saving for developers if IBM BPM is improved in this area to provide many functionalities or drag-and-drop options so that the developers don't have to write the code.""The integration could be improved.""IBM BPM integrated with Spark UI and the UI is now much better, but they still need to improve the UI because competitors have predefined templates and other additional features. In these competitor's solutions, you are able to use the templates, map your data, and the form is ready to use. With this solution, you need to write a lot of code to have the same quality as the competitor's templates. It would be a benefit to make this platform more towards low-code or no-code.""From the testing perspective and minor enhancements perspective, customization is something that is a little tedious as compared to new tools. In addition, various open-source tools that are available are not working with IBM BPM.""This is technology, and there's always room for improvement. It would be better to have a single solution. Trying to have an overview in terms of this solution brings together the concepts of BPM processes, customer journeys, and an automation part for KPIs. All of this working together and coming up with a single solution with privacy is more commercial than anything else.""IBM BPM is stable, but sometimes there are issues with the server.""I would like to see the solution be able to interact with other customer software solutions.""Our developers are complaining that it's too complex to maintain."

More IBM BPM Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "Its price is on the higher side, and it can be improved. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
  • "IBM could improve the price. It is far too expensive."
  • "I wish it was less expensive. I don't know why their pricing model is so high for a piece of software that could benefit so many. It just seems to me that they could have a lower cost, maybe with fewer features or whatever, but it should be possible to do a lower cost workflow software that uses the same interface and underlying engine but does not cost so much that you have to be a Fortune 50 company to buy it. It is annoying to me. There are a lot of solutions that IBM has that are really powerful but nobody can afford them. They know their business, but I still feel that there are a lot of customers who would benefit from this sort of thing. I don't know what this elitism is all about. I am sure they have people doing the money numbers, but it seems like you can make a lot more money by selling it to way more people for a little bit less."
  • "When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors."
  • "It's expensive. All software is always extremely high. The manufacturing cost that we have compared to the selling cost, it's not like you're building a house or building a car. But putting that aside, considering that it's expensive, it's a lot of money. If you compare it with some of the other alternatives in the market, it's a similar price. For instance, if you compare it with Pegasystems, it's a similar price."
  • "The price of the solution is fair for an enterprise solution that has both cloud and on-premise deployments and when comparing to competitors. Recently IBM has introduced Cloud Pak which allows for more flexible licensing options for automation and other features."
  • "Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
  • "I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
  • More IBM BPM Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
    622,645 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We pay for the solution yearly. I cannot speak to the exact amount the organization pays as the licensing part of the solution isn't something I deal with directly.
    Top Answer:I haven't really gone in deep in utilizing the full functionality of the product just yet. We just use it enough to run our application. There's probably a lot on the solution we haven't even tried… more »
    Top Answer:We researched both IBM solutions and in the end, we chose Business Automation Workflow. IBM BPM has a good user interface and the BPM coach is a helpful tool. The API is very useful in providing… more »
    Top Answer:The solution has helped us automate business processes.
    Top Answer:In terms of licensing, we have to make it free for the developers so more people can install and use it. It is important to make at least licensing free to try in the cloud, not just for IBM BPM but… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    3,868
    Comparisons
    2,491
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    692
    Rating
    7.0
    Views
    14,730
    Comparisons
    11,790
    Reviews
    29
    Average Words per Review
    500
    Rating
    7.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Apache HTTP Server
    WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process Server
    Learn More
    Overview

    The Apache HTTP Server Project was founded in 1995 by a group of webmasters, known as The Apache Group, with the aim of developing robust, richly-featured, freely-available and commercial-standard Web (HTTP) server source code. The result was Apache Web Server or Apache HTTP Server, which is an open-source public-domain web server.

    This collaborative project has been enhanced ever since with contributions from the core development team and other volunteers situated all over the globe. Also, hundreds of users of this open-source web server have contributed code, ideas, and documentation. The project falls under The Apache Software Foundation, which manages many open-source projects.

    IBM Business Process Manager is a comprehensive BPM platform giving you visibility and insight to manage business processes. It scales smoothly and easily from an initial project to a full enterprise-wide program harnesses complexity in a simple environment to better meet customer needs.
    Offer
    Learn more about Apache Web Server
    Learn more about IBM BPM
    Sample Customers
    Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
    Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito Santo
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Computer Software Company20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Educational Organization6%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm56%
    Insurance Company14%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Real Estate/Law Firm5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Comms Service Provider16%
    Insurance Company5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise40%
    Large Enterprise20%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise63%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise68%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise73%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Infrastructure
    July 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, F5, Microsoft and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: July 2022.
    622,645 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Apache Web Server is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 1 review while IBM BPM is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 29 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 7.0, while IBM BPM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Easy to use and quick to deploy with good security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users, but it is expensive, and the Eclipse-based tool has performance issues when you have a lot of developers". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Microsoft .NET Framework, NGINX Plus and IBM WebSphere Message Broker, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda Platform, IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Appian and Apache Airflow.

    See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.

    We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.