We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and JBoss 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.
"The performance is good."
"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."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features might be the stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server."
"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 solution is very stable and robust."
"The solution has good performance."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendliness and reliability in terms of application hosting."
"There's good documentation and a pretty good community surrounding the product."
"We can deploy the applications on the JBoss server, so it is easy to manage. It's also easy to add new certificates to the config."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It is a Java-based product, so it is pretty straightforward. It is pretty easy from a developer's perspective. It is also pretty reliable and scalable."
"The high availability is great."
"The most valuable feature is the UI."
"The product integrates well with Java applications."
"When compared with WebLogic, Weblogic is lighter and consumes less memory."
"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."
"Based on the field and based on the build that was provided, we've noticed a lot of constraints in terms of the performance now."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Having the support combined with Red Hat support would be an improvement."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Sometimes the console has a glitch."
"The documentation could be better. When we have questions, we need to check multiple websites. There isn't one place listing a set of common problems and how to fix them."
"It can have automation features. Everybody is focused right now on automation. In terms of saving cost, automation is always the first thing that comes to light."
"In general, the support of the ERPC would be really good due to the fact that, so far, I have not seen it."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 2nd in Application Server with 10 reviews while JBoss is ranked 5th in Application Server with 7 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while JBoss is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Bad documentation, does not scale well, and has a lot of complexities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JBoss writes "Good documentation, very stable, and scalable". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, IBM BPM and Apache Web Server, whereas JBoss is most compared with Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, Oracle GlassFish, IIS and Oracle Fusion Middleware. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. JBoss report.
See our list of best Application Server 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.
