We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and NGINX Plus 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 feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"The solution has good integration."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"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."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"NGINX Plus also has NGINX App Protect. It's a separate module, which is inspired by the F5 apps."
"I need to highlight that the number one thing about NGINX is that it is free."
"The product is lightweight and fast."
"Its most valuable features are load balancing and application delivery. This is the most efficient application for these features because of stability and its efficiency."
"I find the solution’s community support and documentation most valuable. Compared to HAProxy, have found a lot of documentation and community support on Quora. If you would be asking me as a developer whether to choose this product, I would recommend this since it has good community support, documentation, and signature updates. The configuration of HAProxy is also very tedious. However, NGINX’s configuration is very simple."
"When you use NGINX, you have more options and power."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is simple to configure."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"I would like it to have a more user-friendly graphical interface."
"The scaling should be built into the software rather than configured from an outside source."
"The KPI should be more focused on load balancing and the latency in application calling from the end system."
"Our most challenging part was to run an older PHP website reverse-proxied through NGINX. That was not fun."
"They should do in the open source version of what they did to Advanced HTTP, TCP, and UDP load balancing."
"Make modules easier to enable or disable. The beauty and ugly side of the NGINX modules is you have to know how to compile the module. For beginners or non-very technical aspirant(s) going for NGINX, they have to learn how to compile the modules."
"Lack of a feature to print data on the terminal for verification of network traffic during debugging and testing."
"The biggest room for improvement would be to allow NGINX Core machines to cluster for memory zones in some way with a plug and play module. "
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while NGINX Plus is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 27 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Apache Web Server. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. NGINX Plus 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.
