We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and WebLogic Suite 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."Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"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."
"It integrates well with other solutions."
"The feature that I have found to be the most valuable is the ease of deployment."
"This is a robust solution."
"A valuable feature is its integration with Oracle Database."
"The most valuable feature of WebLogic is it has excellent performance and stability compared to the previous solution we used."
"The product is reliable."
"WebLogic Suite is scalable."
"Scalability on the solution is great. It's very very easy to scale."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"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."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"There are sometimes issues with clusters."
"Lacking a solution for smaller applications."
"Support could be better. The expertise when we have some Oracle WebLogic issues and challenges is not there. The issues are not being addressed in time. This really needs to be improved going forward."
"The solution needs to share more information in terms of training. There needs to be more documentation involved to help those who are completely new to the product."
"I would like to see the licensing policy simplified."
"The restart capability needs to be improved because it takes us 15 minutes to restart any application."
"The support is not good."
"I noticed a few areas for improvement in WebLogic Suite. If you use the pure play higher-availability features, then yes, it can be switched over to the other system from the high-availability point of view, but that comes with a certain price. If you prefer simpler high-availability, that requires manual intervention. I'd also recommend a tuning feature in WebLogic Suite because it's not self-tuning, and this means you need thorough expertise to do the tuning and leverage the best benefit out of it. If Oracle makes WebLogic Suite automated or self-driven, then it becomes a wonderful product, similar to what Oracle did for the Autonomous Database which is self-driven or has an autonomous operating system. If automation is added in the next release of the solution, combined with more affordable pricing, though as a technical person, I know how much goes into having automation as a feature, and it could be difficult to lower the price, but if Oracle can do it, then that would make WebLogic Suite better."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while WebLogic Suite is ranked 11th in Application Infrastructure with 31 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while WebLogic Suite is rated 8.2. 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 WebLogic Suite writes "Simple setup, reliable, and performs well". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and IBM BPM, whereas WebLogic Suite is most compared with Oracle SOA Suite, Microsoft .NET Framework, Oracle WebCenter, Apache Web Server and NGINX Plus. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. WebLogic Suite 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.
