We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and IIS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendliness and reliability in terms of application hosting."
"The solution has good performance."
"The solution is very stable and robust."
"The only reason why we're currently using WebSphere is that the integration of the authentication with Azure is very quick. WebSphere has something that can immediately connect with Azure Active Directory."
"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."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"The initial setup of IIS is easy. The process takes only five minutes."
"Windows Server IIS is stable."
"IIS's best features are its management console and stability."
"IIS has a very simple and user-friendly interface, which helps a lot in effective and efficient management."
"When you are working with Microsoft solutions, you will see that the integration with the operating system, and implementing some security features, are easier in IIS than when using another solution."
"The most valuable feature of IIS is it does not consume a lot of resources. It does not consume a lot of resources, such as memory."
"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."
"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."
"What could be improved in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its interconnection with other products, for example, Kafka. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is a better graphical user interface."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"In spite of the solution's robustness, it is expensive and a bit difficult to support."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
"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."
"IIS's memory management could be improved."
"Sometimes if you are using IIS in large-scale scenarios, meaning that if you are deploying an application within IIS service and you are expecting a large number of users to use this application, you can sometimes find some problems, meaning that the service can shut down by itself unexpectedly if you don't configure your IIS with the correct configuration that can handle this number of users."
"Having no support for other than a Microsoft environment and programming languages limits the usage of IIS in many cases."
"I am using an older version of Windows Server IIS and the general management and navigation to get something done is not as straightforward as I hope it to be. The interface could be improved."
"IIS could improve by having some features related to ASR and HTTPS certificate generation."
"IIS could improve the error logging. There are times we are not able to see the errors. More details would be helpful. Additionally, the configuring of the IIS should be allowed through coding instead of the classic view."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 3rd in Application Server with 10 reviews while IIS is ranked 1st in Application Server with 6 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.6, while IIS is rated 8.8. 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 IIS writes "Easy to install, and integrate with the operating system". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, JBoss and Microsoft .NET Framework, whereas IIS is most compared with NGINX Plus, Apache Web Server, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. IIS report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors and best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.
