We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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.
"The most valuable features are its user-friendliness and reliability in terms of application hosting."
"The solution is very stable and robust."
"The performance is good."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"What's most valuable in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its resilience. When you use the solution, you know that after the communication has been done, there will be no doubt that the data has reached its destination."
"The solution has good performance."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"In spite of the solution's robustness, it is expensive and a bit difficult to support."
"The business logic side of it is sort of missing in the sense that if I want to track and measure velocity, it is not really available. You have to buy another application and embark on a separate implementation. Instead of having different licensing, IBM DataPower should be integrated with WebSphere. It will allow us to build the business layer and rules a lot more efficiently, rather than developing rules within the application. It would be good if we can set up the business layer through parametrization rather than development. IBM DataPower has the business rule and the controls, and if it can be integrated, it would be fantastic. It will help the application in working better in terms of security features and business logic. If you're going to use it for open banking, you will be able to monitor velocity on the total pricing."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"When we run into memory or locking issues, we resort to using third-party tools. However, it would be preferable to have native tools for debugging this type of problem."
"The licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 10 reviews while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 16th in Application Infrastructure with 2 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.6, while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Very stable, supports many languages, and helpful for faster time to market". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and JBoss, whereas IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, IBM BPM, Mule ESB and JBoss Enterprise Application Platform. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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.