IBM Integration Bus Reviews

I worked with Integration Bus for a UK-based insurance client and banking domain client. Our main use cases are for integrating different systems. We were involved in integrating their master data management domain.

The message queue connectors are the most valuable feature. They have built-in connectors for most of the systems, like SAP and Oracle Database.

The password settings need improvement. 

I have been using Integration Bus for five years. 

The solution is highly stable. 

The scalability is very high. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The pricing of the solution is high. 

Overall, I would rate the product a ten out of ten.

Whenever we want to secure our data, we connect to IBM Integration Bus, and they use that for security.

One very good feature is the UI, and it's easy to understand how to implement the tool.

The configuration could be improved. If you build an option in the toolkit, such as a health configuration, we should load the command and configure it. We should then just run checks, and the configuration should be completed.

I've been working with the solution for almost five years.

The solution is stable. I rate the solution's stability a five to six out of ten. 

The solution is scalable. I rate the scalability a five to six out of ten.

The initial setup is easy. If the customer requires any API on any server, it should take a maximum of five to six seconds to deploy.

The solution is easy to understand, and it's a good tool for development and security. I rate IBM Integration Bus a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for a digital payment system.

The Cloud Pak for Integration is a useful feature.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for five years. We are the solution provider.

The solution is stable.

The product is scalable. There are four customers using this solution.

The initial setup is not complex, but you should have a good understanding of programming. Installation depends on the project. For some projects with a limited interface, it takes two to three months, but for a bigger and complex one, installation can take up to six months.

In banks, it is deployed on both Cloud and On-premise.

The solution is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use IBM Integration Bus for 600 applications that we're running.

The most valuable feature is the security.

Sometimes migration takes too long.

I have been using this solution for nine years.

It's a stable solution.

It's very scalable. When you deploy the solution, you have the option to create two different policies.

We haven't needed to use technical support very much. We reached out to IBM about a problem we had with HashMap.

I was the developer consultant.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

We use IBM Integration Bus as a bank middleware solution. 

The solution does omnichannel integration with the core banking and other systems, including core banking, ETC, and click systems. It does so for a host of systems. 

The solution addresses all of our middleware needs in respect of transformation, parsing, security and stability; everything really. 

IBM Integration Bus could have better REST API, which could be more powerful,  and this accounts for why we are looking for alternative solutions concerning this and open banking. 

The initial setup was complex. 

Technical support is below what I would consider to be very good. It's good, but not too much or very much so.

The solution is complex and there is a need for more resources and greatly improved quality. 

The solution addresses our stability needs. 

Thus far, we have been making maximum use of the solution. 

Technical support is below what I would consider to be very good. It's good, but not too much or very much so.

We previously used a local solution and replaced this with a new enterprise solution. 

The initial setup was complex. 

Including preparation time, addressing the environment and building the POC, deployment took around one month. We are talking about active, on-premises deployment. 

There are nearly five people required for deployment and maintenance. 

Management would be in a position to address whether we have seen a return on our investment. This said, we have witnessed some returns on our business so far. 

I prefer not to address the licensing costs, or any other for that matter, as this is confidential. 

We did evaluate other products before going with IBM Integration Bus. 

We are customers of the vendor.

From a development perspective, there are nearly 40 people using this solution in our organization, although we have thousands of customers who do so indirectly. 

The solution probably covers more than 95 percent of the integration requirements. 

I rate IBM Integration Bus as a seven out of ten. 

I found all features valuable. There are a lot of connectors. 

Its documentation is currently lacking. We have different environments where we use our configuration services, but we are not able to find documentation about how to deploy the local code to the server and how to set it up on a server level. I would like more documents from IBM that explain which variables should be in your machine while building a project, and when you deploy the code into the server, what should be their values. There are some variable values. I could not find such documentation. While working on a project, I developed the code on a local machine, and while deploying the code to our test environment, I made a couple of mistakes. We had to change some values at the server level, but we couldn't find any documentation regarding this, which made the task difficult.

Everyone is moving to the cloud. There is Bluemix from IBM. There should be more connectors that can connect with cloud systems.

I have been working with this solution for seven years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. Our customers are in the medium range.

I never interacted with IBM's technical support for IIB. I haven't raised any tickets so far.

I also work with MuleSoft. Comparing IIB to MuleSoft, IIB is always used by big companies because it is a licensed solution, whereas MuleSoft is open source. So, small organizations use MuleSoft. Our clients in the USA, Canada, and Dubai preferred IIB over MuleSoft because they have more belief in IBM products, and they feel more secure and safe while using it.

Its installation is easy.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It is a good product. A lot of new products have come into the market, such as Tibco, MuleSoft, but this product still exists, and clients do believe in this product.

It is used to enable communication between applications. For example, when application A needs to interact with application B, IBM Integration Bus provides a kind of bridge that helps application A to communicate with application B in terms of messaging. Application A might be using a specific format, such as XML, which needs to be converted into the format understood by application B. IBM Integration Bus takes care of this transformation and routing of messages from application A to application B. I have seen IIB been used in the banking, payments, and finance domains.

It makes the communication between multiple and heterogeneous applications so easy. We can bring together different messages and applications from different platforms and connect them through IBM Integration Bus.

They need to come up with Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). It should also have a feature for integrating with those applications that are on the cloud.

I have been using this solution for the past four years.

It is stable. There are plenty of projects that have been using this tool. My friends or my ex-colleagues who have moved to other organizations also find it good.

I don't have an insight into the scalability as such, but based on the meetings related to the maintenance of the application, I did not come across any scalability-related issues.

There were a couple of instances when my team approached them, and there was a good response from the IBM team. There were some delays, but that happened almost three to four years ago. Their support might have improved recently.

It is quite straightforward. For our project, we do have different needs. We build artifacts that are ready to be deployed. These artifacts need to be placed in a specific folder or directory. They are then picked up and deployed in the servers. It is quite automated these days.

Its deployment is quick. It is a matter of seconds.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

We are using the solution as an outer layer for all of our API calls we are making outside of our own devices. All APIs integrations are routing through the ESB only. We are using it for IIB server components and the DataPower, which is an API gateway. It is providing us with a security layer because all the outside calls do not have direct communication with our own server, this middle layer is called the ESB. 

The solution has helped my organization because any new integration coming to my backend system, we can easily implement it in a shorter time. This is because the middle layer takes care of all API language conversions or the code conversion, and also does the maintaining of the logs.

Having the solution come from IBM you know you are receiving a product of quality in components and in the services, it is very good.

I do not think there are any improvement areas because it depends on what exactly the use case for this ESB is. Some organizations are having a lot of integration and they will choose a regular ESB. While others will choose the security purpose route, making an extra layer. It depends from organization to organization, to determine how this solution can be improved from their specific use cases. Otherwise, I think that there are not any relevant improvement areas to give.

I used the solution in my last company for a long while.

The solution came to the market a long while ago, it has had time to mature. It is really stable and large organizations can rely on it. Smaller companies could too but it is too expensive.

It is a scalable solution. You can have any number of integration, it depends on the server and how much space you are providing to the IIB servers. We plan to have more than 50 wired integration by the end of the year.

The installation is not easy. You need experts who know how to install this IIB. The common technician will not have the knowledge to do it. You will need assistance installing the solution even though on IBM's website you can download the complete user manual explaining how to install the IIB servers. 

We used a third-party vendor, who help us install the solution and it was not easy. If you have most things in place at the site the whole installation process can take approximately three days. 

To do the complete deployment you will need at least one architecture that understands this IIB solution. It all depends on what kind of IP division architecture you have. Based on the project's scope, you then can define your team. There is no certain number of how many team members is required. It depends on your project, how large it is, and based on that you can decide how much manpower is required.

The solution requires a license and is very expensive here in India. Large organizations will be able to afford it but smaller companies will have a difficult time paying for the solution at the current price.

I am going to continue to use this solution, when you purchase this solution you have spent a lot of money, you have to continue to use it to make a return on investment.

I would recommend this solution if they have a large budget.

I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.