"The product is a user-customized tool so that you can adjust it to your specific needs pretty well with little trouble."
"I found all features valuable. There are a lot of connectors."
"The interface is quite stable."
"It's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle."
"I recommend it for large enterprises but only for specific use cases. You need to have a relatively mature integration practice in your organization to leverage its capabilities fully."
"IBM Integration Bus is flexible, easy to use, and easy to configure."
"The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications."
"I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things. The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."
"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support."
"Storage capacity of the product should be addressed."
"I would rate the support from IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten. They are very helpful but sometimes it takes too long for them to respond."
"The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box."
"I think security should be more simplified."
"Its licensing or subscription model should be improved for more flexible adoption. There should also be more ease of use."
"The next versions are moving toward container use. It would be a shame to make the product highly complex just to support one pattern of deployment. It is my hope that IBM continues to focus on practical functionality that is simple and cost-effective."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."
"What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users."
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 3rd in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 33 reviews while Red Hat Fuse is ranked 5th in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 12 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 7.6, while Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Good integration capabilities with an easy-to-learn language but is very expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Reliable, good support, saves time and reduces data entry errors". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, IBM DataPower Gateway, Oracle Service Bus and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, webMethods Integration Server and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse report.
See our list of best ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) vendors.
We monitor all ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) 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.
