JBoss ESB vs Red Hat Fuse comparison

"The solution is very easy to use. I can download the trial version and just give it a go."

"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."

"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."

"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."

"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."

"It's very lightweight. There's no need for any specialized tools in order to deploy any service for Red Hat Fuse."

"The initial setup process is quite straightforward."

"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."

"The solution has more tooling and options."

"The EPA, from what I understand, lacks a lot of features and it doesn't really know how to interface with legacy systems or how to develop APIs for legacy systems."

"JBoss ESB should focus on startup and performance as EAP is heavier than lightweight Java frameworks, which impacts microservices and cloud environments."

"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."

"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."

"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."

"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."

"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."

"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."

"The user interface is not good, and it is a very technical tool."

"The web tools need to be updated."

"You need to pay for the license. It's not free."

"My company pays for the license of Red Hat Fuse yearly. At the end of the day, it's a low-cost solution, and its support licenses are still very decently priced versus bigger operators such as IBM, etc. Red Hat Fuse is much more affordable than other solutions. On a scale of one to five, with one being cheap and five being extremely expensive, I'm rating its pricing a one."

"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."

"We found other solutions were more costly."

"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."

"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."

"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."

"This is an expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."