Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache Web Server vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Web Server
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of Apache Web Server is 11.0%, up from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 1.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Sakthivel Veeramuthu - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to optimize for high performance and handle heavy traffic
Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours. Because I needed to optimize the Apache web server to run it as a high performer during my customers' usage, then I needed to reduce my Apache web server resource usage for that. So that part of the thing is what I was more interested in doing. So, I mainly liked the performance and security.
BrajendraKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability
I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It's very stable, and it hosts one of the biggest of many biggest web applications in the world."
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"The most significant advantage is the ability to swiftly enable HTTPS services when my DNS is configured correctly."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"The product is very cheap and stable."
"The control panel is very easy to navigate. It's similar to most hosting platforms, so it's user-friendly. Once you get used to it, managing your hosting becomes easy, too."
"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."
"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
 

Cons

"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"In future releases, I would like to see better server optimization."
"Its stability could be better."
"There isn't a dedicated customer support available"
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a free-of-cost solution."
"The apache software is free, open-source."
"It is an open-source solution."
"There is no licensing cost for the product."
"The solution is expensive."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"The solution is expensive."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
18%
University
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apache Web Server?
The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Web Server?
Apache Web Server is a free product, with no associated setup costs or licensing fees.
What needs improvement with Apache Web Server?
There is no need for substantial improvements as we have a dedicated team managing the server, ensuring everything runs smoothly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...
 

Also Known As

Apache HTTP Server
WebSphere Message Broker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Web Server vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.