Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs Windows Server AppFabric comparison

IBM and Microsoft are both solutions in the Application Infrastructure category. IBM is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while Microsoft is ranked #18 with an average rating of 8.5. IBM holds a 1.6% mindshare in AIS, compared to Microsoft’s 0.6% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Read 13 IBM WebSphere Message Broker reviews
  • 287 Views
  • 60 Comparison Views
84% willing to recommend
Windows Server AppFabric
Read 4 Windows Server AppFabric reviews
  • 174 Views
  • 39 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Windows Server AppFabric are enterprise integration solutions. IBM WebSphere Message Broker has an edge due to its capabilities and robustness, while AppFabric emphasizes ease of integration in Windows environments.

Features: IBM WebSphere Message Broker provides extensive protocol support, complex event processing, and robust message transformation. It handles large volumes of data from multiple sources. Windows Server AppFabric allows seamless Windows and .NET integration, simplified caching, and workflow management.

Room for Improvement: IBM WebSphere Message Broker requires improved user interface design, reduced complexity for simpler tasks, and more accessible training resources. Windows Server AppFabric could enhance its cross-platform compatibility, expand protocol support beyond Windows, and improve scalability for larger enterprises.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Windows Server AppFabric offers straightforward deployment and administration within Windows ecosystems, making it more intuitive for those familiar with the platform. IBM WebSphere Message Broker provides robust enterprise-level deployment options but may require more setup and specialized skills. While both provide adequate customer service, IBM supports customization needs, and AppFabric aligns more with Microsoft's ecosystem.

Pricing and ROI: Windows Server AppFabric presents lower initial setup costs and quicker ROI, especially for organizations invested in Windows infrastructure. IBM WebSphere Message Broker, potentially more costly in licensing and setup, offers long-term scalability and versatility benefits.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric Report (Updated: June 2025).
Buyer's Guide
IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric
June 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 857,028 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (8th)
Windows Server AppFabric
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
18th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 1.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server AppFabric is 0.6%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

BrajendraKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability
I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.
Read full review
VIJAY RAGAVAN - PeerSpot reviewer
Ensure seamless deployment and networking with a focus on critical uptime
The most important issue I've found is the blue screen errors, particularly when customers use external displays with a P-type cable. I have advised against using external displays for crucial applications and recommended using VGA or laptop adapter screens to mitigate this issue. However, the blue screen error remains a major concern because it causes data loss during reboots.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"
"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."
"The solution has good integration."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"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 is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
More IBM WebSphere Message Broker pros
"The product's deployment phase was very easy."
"The ability to seamlessly deploy, image, and patch without causing downtime is extremely helpful and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is AppFabric's hosting solution, which is what we need for running workflows."
"It is very usable and easy to understand. Antivirus and VPN are the main features being used now. It allows my clients to access the network from home, which was very crucial because of the pandemic."
 

Cons

"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."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"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."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"The product's features are not being upgraded or enhanced by the vendor"
More IBM WebSphere Message Broker cons
"Its price and licensing policy can be improved. It could be a little cheaper. Licensing is sometimes confusing. There are so many different options. It is difficult to find out what to buy or what to choose for my necessity."
"The most important issue I've found is the blue screen errors, particularly when customers use external displays with a P-type cable."
"Microsoft will stop supporting the product next year, and we can't run unsupported programs in our systems."
"The product is unable to connect with different cloud services."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"The solution is expensive."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"It is expensive, and its licensing is a bit confusing."
"The product is affordable, in my opinion."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.
See all answers
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...
See all answers
What do you like most about Windows Server AppFabric?
The product's deployment phase was very easy.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Windows Server AppFabric?
The product is affordable, in my opinion.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Windows Server AppFabric?
The most important issue I've found is the blue screen errors, particularly when customers use external displays with a P-type cable. I have advised against using external displays for crucial appl...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

IBM Integration Bus vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker Logo
IBM Integration Bus vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Compared 49% of the time
webMethods.io vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker Logo
webMethods.io vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Compared 17% of the time
IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker Logo
IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Compared 13% of the time
Mule ESB vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker Logo
Mule ESB vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Compared 11% of the time
IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker Logo
IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Compared 10% of the time
More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Competitors
No data available
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
June 2025
IBM WebSphere Message Broker reportDownload IBM WebSphere Message Broker product report
Buyer's Guide
Application Infrastructure
June 2025
Windows Server AppFabric reportDownload Windows Server AppFabric product report
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Message Broker
No data available
 

Overview

WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.
IBM
Windows Server AppFabric extends Windows Server to provide enhanced hosting, management, and caching capabilities for Web applications and middle-tier services. The AppFabric hosting features add service management extensions to Internet Information Services (IIS), Windows Process Activation Service (WAS), and the .NET Framework 4. This includes Hosting Services and Hosting Administration tools that make it easier to deploy, configure, and manage Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) and Windows Workflow Foundation (WF) based services. The AppFabric caching features add a distributed, in-memory object cache to Windows Server that makes it easier to scale out high-performance .NET applications, especially ASP.NET applications.
Microsoft
 

Sample Customers

WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
OSIsoft
Buyer's Guide
IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric
June 2025
Free Report: IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Windows Server AppFabric 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.