We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Oracle Service Bus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"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."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The solution has good integration."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The interface is fine and the solution is quite robust."
"The ability to master the process in one location."
"It is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the adapters."
"What I like most about Oracle Service Bus is that you can use it for many integrations. For example, you can use it for on-premises to on-premises integrations, on-premises to cloud integrations, and cloud to on-premises integrations."
"Supports multiple protocol technologies and web services."
"I am a part of the software developing team and I mainly use this solution for the integrating applications."
"What I found most valuable in Oracle Service Bus is its time to market. It's excellent."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"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."
"Security features can be improved to better protect the server."
"Security needs to be more integrated."
"It would be ideal if they could optimize it a bit."
"This solution should work better with RESTful services."
"There is significant room for improvement in the monitoring capabilities."
"Lacks sufficient cloud compatibility."
"This solution would benefit from having more cloud-based adapters."
"An area for improvement in Oracle Service Bus is the roadmap for its product launch. Currently, it's unclear, so Oracle should develop a roadmap for version 12c, so people can see what's coming out of that version of Oracle Service Bus. Cloud hosting is an additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Oracle Service Bus."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews while Oracle Service Bus is ranked 5th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 25 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while Oracle Service Bus is rated 7.8. 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 Oracle Service Bus writes "Enables us to do a lot of aggregation and routing, but API response can be a problem if the payload is heavy". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and IIS, whereas Oracle Service Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server and Red Hat Fuse. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Oracle Service Bus report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.
