We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and IBM WebSphere Application Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With the tester coach wherein you can interact with the interface while you're designing the process."
"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 is stable."
"IBM BPM is a stable solution."
"Our customers use the solution as a workflow platform to manage their processes."
"Its Analytics is the most valuable feature."
"One of the most notable things is how you can develop use cases with the customers, internal customers, but directly within. The software process model that BPM supports is really exciting in that aspect."
"It has reduced a lot of manual errors and processes."
"Without the Admin Console it would be very hard to configure JVM settings, JDBC datasources, mail session settings, and security providers."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"As compared to other applications, it has tremendous support. We have built internal capability so that we use it extensively internally. It is also easier to use with the outside data. You can write in ESQL, Java, or any other technology that you want to use for development. So, it is a lot more flexible in the language that it supports."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"The thing about WebSphere, as opposed to other ones that I am aware of such as JBoss and Liberty, is that WebSphere has the most comprehensive scaffolding available to it."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendliness and reliability in terms of application hosting."
"Security: It is compatible with the latest Java 8 security features, supports FIPS 140-2 and NIST SP 800-53 with strong ciphers and cryptography keys, and supports TLS 1.2 completely. Also, configuring client and server certificates is relatively easy."
"The user experience, while it has improved, should continue to improve."
"We care about technology and support because support is very important and a BPM is not easy to implement."
"Better integration with other products in the automation suite."
"Also, we would like to see integration with artificial intelligence, machine learning-type of technical capabilities. Right now, there are a lot Watson libraries out there. Building those integrations more, out-of-the-box, from IBM would be a good direction."
"It's a bit technical, related to the instance of migrations. It's a tough thing to handle, in every new release, in every upgrade, that we have to do things in the applications or in the product. I think IBM is working on it but I know there are a lot of requests coming in from different organizations on this."
"The setup was quite complex because the solution was cutting-edge at that time and IBM invested considerably in the implementation, likely at a loss to themselves."
"I would say the scalability is very good but it's not perfect. It is much more scalable than it has been in the past but... it does require some work to keep it stable. So that is an area that should be improved."
"User Interface components could be further refined to enhance and extend customizations dictated by end clients."
"Initial setup is very simple. Just use the IBM Installation Manager and add the packages. The install wizard takes care of the rest. The only thing that can be difficult is to find the right packages on the IBM website, because of all the changes that IBM does on its website(s)."
"I think that this is a good product but I think that the cloud environment could be improved. I think that the future is in the utilization of the product in a product as a service way which is something that is lacking at this moment."
"While WebSphere mostly supports IBM HTTP Server (IHS) as the web server plugin, I think it would be beneficial if it also supported Apache and NGINX web servers. That would give customers more flexibility in their choices."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product."
"The solution consumes hardware."
"The solution could improve the integration."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Nintex Process Platform, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and HCL Digital Experience. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server report.
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.