JBoss and Oracle Fusion Middleware compete in the enterprise application server market. JBoss appears to have the upper hand in cost-effectiveness and ease of deployment, while Oracle Fusion Middleware offers more comprehensive integration with Oracle products.
Features: JBoss provides high availability, scalability, and cost-effective implementation. It offers flexibility, easy setup, and efficient deployment with robust support from Red Hat. Oracle Fusion Middleware provides comprehensive integration, especially with Oracle products, numerous adapters, and strong service-oriented architecture capabilities.
Room for Improvement: JBoss needs modernization in service exposure technologies and improvements in logging and documentation. Console glitches and support bundling are additional concerns. Oracle Fusion Middleware requires enhanced SOA component flexibility, improved third-party application integration, and better documentation for new users.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: JBoss mainly supports on-premises deployments but lacks hybrid or cloud options where Oracle Fusion Middleware excels. JBoss's cost-effective support is balanced by slow response times, and Oracle struggles with costly support and slow responses.
Pricing and ROI: JBoss is generally more affordable with a competitive licensing model, offering favorable ROI in larger implementations. Oracle Fusion Middleware, though costly, is suitable for larger enterprises due to its extensive features, making it a stronger choice for comprehensive enterprise support and integration.
This flexibility translates to a lower total cost of ownership.
Oracle Fusion Middleware is a good product that meets ROI expectations.
We receive support from RDS and Red Hat, and the response time and quality meet our expectations.
Oracle provides eight-level customer service and support.
Customer service for Oracle products, including Oracle Fusion Middleware, is rated at nine points out of ten, indicating it is quite satisfactory.
For on-premises deployment, scalability has to be managed manually.
It is quite stable for our needs.
Overall, Oracle Fusion Middleware's stability is good.
Making it lighter and more modular would probably be beneficial.
I would like to see improved booting of applications altogether on one page to manage all data instances from one location, similar to an AWS console.
Although Oracle provides support, I need the appropriate IT team to adopt these new features.
The guides often have errors, such as web scripting issues, and can be difficult to follow.
JBoss is the cheaper option out of the three when compared to WebSphere and WebLogic.
The price is somewhat high for an enterprise, however, it depends on organizational negotiations.
Oracle Fusion Middleware is generally expensive, although I'm not directly involved with the licensing aspects.
Pricing varies from customer to customer, however, it is reasonable compared to other products in the market.
Built-in metrics and subsystem isolation, where every subsystem logging, messaging, or web services can be tuned independently, provide fine-grained control over performance and behavior.
It allows for simple modification of applications and provides better clustering capabilities.
JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries.
Compared to competitors, its cost-effectiveness and Oracle's regular updates every three months are advantageous.
Oracle Fusion Middleware's base installation is ready to use, allowing for quick integration of applications and installation of necessary resources.
Oracle Fusion Middleware is the digital business platform for the enterprise and the cloud. It enables enterprises to create and run agile, intelligent business applications while maximizing IT efficiency through full utilization of modern hardware and software architectures.
We monitor all Application Server 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.
