IBM Integration Bus Reviews

The solution is deployed on-premises.

The message queue feature is very valuable.

The product could be improved by including more resources on SQL and improving the simplicity of the resources available. Additionally, the price can be reduced.

We have been using this solution for approximately four years and are currently using the first version.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and there are currently many people using the solution in our organization. We have plans to increase the usage of the feature.

It is quite expensive and can be lowered.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

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. 

Our prime use case of Integration Bus is for message enrichment and message transformations. 

The solution offers good performance and it's stable. The message enrichment and message transformations are great features and the solution also has great security.

There are a few issues; the memory footprint needs to be improved. Memory replacements for on-prem should be minimized. Nowadays, if an application takes 4GB of RAM, that should be the minimum. Having this solution on-prem, is taking more memory and that memory footprint should be minimized.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution can be scaled horizontally and vertically.

The initial setup is straightforward and took a maximum of two hours. Our technical team had eight people dealing with the end-to-end deployment. 

I recommend this solution, it's an industry standard product.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We are, of course, using the latest version. 

We use the solution for bridging the gap between different legacy systems. Re-usability is another function of the solution. So too, we use it to limit the challenges faced between different systems that are unable to communicate at the same speed and rate, or that need to talk among different systems, to utilize a channel which is bigger and better, to make use of the back-end or in respect of some other point-to-point integration need. As such, our uses for the solution vary depending on the customer. An example would be that which relates to a banking industry, for which there would be a core banking system, the need for card systems, ATM transactions, et cetera. Middleware plays a key role in the usability of these services. The goal is to avoid point-to-point integration between the channels and the back-end systems making use of the solution.

We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support. 

Our organization has been using IBM Integration Bus in various branches, spanning a host of  locations, since before I joined 14 years ago. It has been doing so for the past 15 to 20 years. 

I consider the solution to be one of the most stable in the market, in comparison with others such as Oracle and this assessment I maintain on an ongoing basis. I have received much feedback from customers about the solution's stability. 

The solution is scalable, but we have yet to receive the full review and feedback. This is because we have been informed that the latest systems have only recently been produced. So, I cannot give you complete feedback about the scalability of the solution at the moment. The latest deployment is on a container platform.

We have received many complaints from customers that the customer and technical support should be faster. 

I believe the initial setup was easy, but this is a question best taken up with the technical team. 

I use the traditional licensing model, which I believe to not be on a monthly basis, as the solution is not cloud-based. 

I don't mind the pricing.

90 percent of days the solution is on the client enrollment. We are hoping to encounter good business cases, involving integration planning, as the trend is for people to gradually transition to the cloud, the government initiative being that involving Azure. 

As we are a service provider, I cannot give you exact figures about the number of users in our organization who are making use of the solution. As mentioned, this depends on the customer, with each one involving its own user type. 

I would, of course, recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM Integration Bus as an eight out of ten. 

We are a financial institution and we are using this solution for the APIs that we provide.

The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications. The learning curve is not steep and it is something that you can pick up within about two weeks.

There are a lot of inbuilt interfaces like ISO and SAP. Having all of these interfaces already built makes integration very easy and straightforward.

One drawback that I have found is that there are issues with using the Java connector. I was running out of heap space.

I have been working with IBM Integration Bus for three years.

The stability is fantastic.

With respect to scalability, IBM Integration Bus is very good.

I have been in contact with technical support and I found that they were very good.

I have not really used any other ESB solutions.

I was not part of the original deployment.

I like to view comparisons to see what people have to say about similar products because I have just recently changed jobs and my new company is trying to purchase an ESB. Although I fully recommend IBM Integration Bus, I think it is important to look and see if other solutions may be better.

Generally speaking, this is a very good product. It is easy to learn and use, and it is robust as well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten

We are a software development company and we use IBM Integration Bus for integrating different internal systems for the customer side and to integrate the internal systems with external systems for different kinds of flows.

There are three elements that make IBM Integration Bus very important for our organization's payroll systems which are the solution's high scalability, performance, and reliability.

The current version of IBM Integration Bus, now called App Connect Enterprise, provides operators for deployment in the OpenShift cluster, which makes deployment much easier and significantly increases the scalability and reliability of the integration solutions.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for approximately two years.

IBM Integration Bus is very reliable and stable. If the right configuration is done, in operation everything is runs very well. If you have not configured everything well then you most likely will have some stability or performance issues.

IBM Integration Bus is scalable. If you are using OpenShift then the solution's scalability becomes even better.

We have approximately 12 people who have the experience to use this solution.

I would rate the support from IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten. They are very helpful but sometimes it takes too long for them to respond.

The implementation of the solution at the beginning phase can be complicated. The time it takes for the implementation depends on the environment a lot of other factors.

The development toolkit that is provided is very good. It helps to configure all the message flows and data transformation. They also provide Extended SQL language (ESQL) for different types of data transformation.

The solution does not require much maintenance.

IBM provides a quite complicated licensing model.

We have evaluated other solutions and we have found that IBM solutions to be highly stable and scalable.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is a content-based tool for system messaging. IIB comes with IBM MQ as its messaging backbone. With respect to our requirements, IIB fits well, and it does its job.

It has improved our company a lot. We have added a lot of adapters. The microservice has provided an advantage for us, so we have a lot of adapters with REST Node.js, which have been added.

IBM used to provide multiple adapters. For example, we also have an adaptor for MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport). 

With respect to our enterprise and SOA compliance (this product fits within the SOA compliance category), we want to talk about microsolution architecture, as enterprises generally enable SOA first before going to microsolutions. It will have to have a long-term approach on the SOA category, as IIB fits with a lot of other IBM products, like the WSRR, IBM DataPower, and MQ. It has a lot of advantages when we are using it or enforcing SOA as an architecture for our enterprises.

IBM does not support orchestration, which is how they designed it, and other BPM tools in the market support orchestration. IIB wasn't designed for short and small transitions which are preferred to be stateless. If they merged the BPM capability into this product, then it would be a better solution.

It is one of the most stable products which I have seen in the market. 

It scalability is seamless. There should not be any issues as long as we integrate fully with our use cases and restrict scenarios that we have tested on different operating systems. We have tested for the high availability and OTS availability. It has worked well so far.

Under certain situations, when what we were expecting is not right, then we contact support, and technical support from IBM is really good. However, IBM support is mostly for the small time stuff, like product releases. In a few years, they will end up the support unless we pay them. The difference is in the cost. Support costs are high compared to their competition. Otherwise, the support is good.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We also evaluated Oracle.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10, because of: 

1. The community. 
2. They provide freeware.
3. The support that IBM provides. 
4. It fits its purpose.
   

IIB is one of the top-rated solution in this category. If looking for a tool which is SOA compliance, you can blindly go for this particular tool. 

The most important criteria when selecting a vendor is support. We are looking for the 24/7 support in respect to that particular product. It should be compliant within our business requirements. Technology is evolving day-by-day and should have an additional features added-on as long as we are required to implement those features, e.g. product security. We are using different encrypted algorithms on encryption screens, and these functionalities are widely adopted by IBM.

In general, we are using IBM Integration Bus for integration purposes only because we have multiple applications to integrate.

I have found IBM Integration Bus is very useful because it can integrate multiple backend applications.

The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for approximately six years.

We have not had any issue with the stability of the solution. However, there are times when we have policies in place and after the installation, the data wizard does not work.

The technical from IBM has been very good.

The installation was straightforward.

IBM Integration Bus itself is prices fair but App-Connect is a bit expensive which we use in conjunction with it.

I have evaluated MuleSoft.

I would recommend this solution to developers.

I rate IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten.