IBM Integration Bus Reviews

The primary use case for the solution is infrastructure optimization. Most times the client wants to optimize their integration infrastructure and they want to simplify it. When they feel home-grown solutions are not scaling well for them in terms of complexity, in terms of speed to market, they look to this solution. Projects take long and they break down all the time. That's when the clients start thinking Integration Bus. It's a solution that offloads all the integrations of their system.

The solution offers pretty good pricing.

The technical support is great.

The solution is stable and can scale relatively easily.

The user interface is easy to navigate.

The performance is decent.

The solution offers good dashboards.

The management and monitoring on offer are very good.

IBM doesn't really have a very strong community surrounding the product. Most of its direct competitors are open source solutions, and those have an excellent and well-developed community around the tech to help users navigate the ins and outs of the product. IBM is lacking in this area. If they had more of a community, more people would know about the product. They should push to create a developer community around it and make the products more accessible to developers.

I've heard some clients are asking for autoscaling capabilities. It could improve DevOps. They might have something similar in other products, however, if they could introduce it within this product at some small level, it would make many clients happy.

We've been using the solution in the company for less than a year.

We've been pleased with the solution's reliability. It's stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. I don't recall facing any bugs or glitches. It just works well all the time.

The solution scales quite well. If a company needs to expand it out, they can do so easily.

Technical support has been good. They're responsive and knowledgeable. We've been satisfied with their support. It's been great.

The implementation is straightforward. It's not complex. What takes a long time, however, is implementing the workflows or projects. That's where the efforts is. In terms of implementation, the implementation is straightforward. However, building the integration of workflows can be a bit tricky. 

You have to pick the right project as the first project, due to the fact that you're introducing a new product inside an organization. The first project is important in terms of setting the stage for understanding the underlying functionality. It shouldn't be too complex. At the same time, it should be impactful enough that you get management support going forward. It should be a project that is big enough whereby you can see the impact of the Integration Bus. 

The pricing is pretty good. What they charge isn't unreasonable.

We're IBM partner-resellers.

The reason we've implemented the solution is driven more by our clients' demands. The clients want IBM Integration Bus, or they already have some investment in IBM Integration Bus. We want to build capability in it to support the clients. We don't have a level of experience with the solution.

My personal advice to others is to start small so that you give yourself a good preliminary base that's not too overwhelming. Most clients want to do everything with this solution, which is fine. However, it's always better to start small with a departmental project, as opposed to an enterprise-wide kind of thing. It is better to start small and tackle a practical project and get used to everything before going really big.

I'd rate the solution nine 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 implement this solution for our customers.

It has the ability to be deployed without rewriting the code. 

I would like for them to make the training much easier. Once you work with a sphere of people that can integrate the solution, then it's stable. But just to educate people, it's not that easy to do. It's not easy content to teach people.

I have been using it for over ten years. 

I have only contacted their support for implementing application integration.

Overall, they're good. They're able to replenish and reboot the data much easier.

The initial setup is straightforward.

IBM is huge once you start it up. There's not a lot of coding, not a lot of method to the mapping, and they have the need for application software management. 

I'd rate it a nine out of 10. It's stable across multiple platforms and across multiple applications. They're very strong and a trusted brand. They are patient and good friends. One of the only challenges is that it is hard to teach people.  

The solution is primarily a middleware. It's security-enabled and we are using the same credentials for development. We plan on making a backend to handle growing requests.

The solution is similar to Adobe X Pro. We can intersect with any of those items.

The scalability is very good.

The integration with other tools is excellent. It integrates well with batch issues.

Overall, the solution works very well.

IBM could improve its connectivity. 

The solution needs to be better integrated with the cloud version of the solution.

The solution is constrained by the environment - whether it's on-premises or the cloud. The cloud seems to be more adaptable.

I've been using the solution since 2014.

The solution is very stable. We haven't found any bugs or glitches. There haven't been crashes. It's quite reliable.

We have more than 20 people that use the solution. We use it on a daily basis. The scalability is good and is simple to expand as necessary.

I didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup is simple enough. Right now, in its entirety, the download is very simple. It's actually a one-click solution.

Deployment takes very little time. It depends mostly on the load and what we are pushing out. However, it usually takes a matter of seconds.

We have 14 people in general on our team using the solution, and they are all able to perform maintenance.

I handled the implementation myself.

I don't have any information about licensing or costs. It's not something that I am in charge of.

We're just IBM customers. We're not partners and we don't have a relationship with the company.

In terms of on-premises vs cloud, I'd suggest users go to the cloud. It obviously depends on the market and the adoption rate.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a basic integration platform for all the complicated technology solutions we have.

The solution's features are all quite useful. We use all of them.

Currently, we have some custom solutions for logs; it would be nice if these solutions could be provided out of the box.

The solution doesn't have a standard testing framework that can be used for integration performance and other tests. 

The user interface could be improved in a future release.

The solution is stable.

The response from technical support is typically quick. However, sometimes when we ask IBM to fix coding, that can take several months. I understand this is because the product is quite sizable.  They can often answer our questions without having to fix the entire product itself and they give a quick and detailed response. 

We previously used other solutions, including Oracle, specifically Oracle Fusion Middleware. IBM is much better. It has many more options and offers more functionality. IBM offers better customization, configuration, and options in general.

The initial setup is reasonable. However, the product requires administrators and developers to spend some time studying or to have previous experience.  Deployment is very fast. 

The first time we purchased the tool, we worked with a consulting company that assisted in the implementation. Now that we have experience, we handle it ourselves.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is as a corporate integration bus, between different financial applications. We use IBM Integration Bus (IIB) with IBM MQ for asynchronous interaction. Additionally, web services for synchronized integration such as REST APIs, SOAP and HTTP Interfaces with XML interaction. For instance, it uses for the integration of the Banking front end with the banking core application. IBM Integration Bus installed on-premise.

Before, we used to use client-server applications with strong interaction. Using the integration bus we quickly broke through the border between client-server and service-oriented architecture. Additionally, we were able to quickly link many other financial services with core bank system or exposed some API for financial services.

This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn.

There are many connectors to different sources and it's easy to scale.

Also, it is easy to parametrize the integration of bus applications during building or deployment. For instance, set up names of the queues, set up binded services URL, set up or change user-defined parameters.

I like the IBM Integration Bus and I hope that it will change in micro-service architecture. My understanding is that it will change to be less connected, and less depends on the operating system or the hardware resources.

I would like to be able to run and install this solution on different platforms and using containers and using modern micro-service and cloud environments.

This solution is quite stable. We use this solution every day.

There are many financial services to be integrated with different APIs, so it was easy to develop it with Integration Bus.

This solution is scalable. As an example, If you are using web services and you want to upscale several connections, we do it by changing one parameter in the application: "Number of additional instances".

Also, it is easier to scale a synchronized interaction with MQ to change one parameter to indicate how many instances you want to execute simultaneously. On the other hand, you can deploy the same application on different integration servers.

We have not used the technical support. We found all of the information that we needed with the IBM documentation.

We used to use client-service applications with strong integration between application. The company implemented many other applications with different interfaces and aimed to link with external services. So that we started using Integration bus for integration legacy application with new applications.

The initial setup was easy. For Windows, you will run the installation file and you have an environment that is ready to develop an integrated solution.

If you want additional resources such an MQ, or databases, you will have to read the manual to understand how to connect them.

The building and deployment are quick and easy. It only takes a few minutes to deploy, depending on the size of your application, but it's fast.

There are two methods of deployment. You can use the manual deployment method using the drag and drop. On the other hand, you can use command-line interface for building and deployment applications. The application represented as one or some number of .bar file. It's something similar to .ear but other structure inside.

You only really need one person to deploy this solution, but we shared build and responsibility using GitLab tool-chain and Nexus Repository. The first factor is for development and building and the other one is for deployment. We use the same process for different environments. All necessary parametrization inside the application are stored as a file and substituted depend on the deployment environment during the building process.

The implementation was done with our team. Additionally, we used the standard development process for teamwork.

We have gone through different comparative solutions and other integrated systems, and IBM Integration Bus is better for enterprise.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to start with reading the documentation. Have a good understanding of how to integrate Integration Bus with different resources, and to have experience with a synchronized interaction with IBM MQ or Apache Kafka. But IBM MQ is preferable.

Also, it is better to have an understanding of the HTTP Interaction and REST API interaction.

I also suggest people participate in IBM online learning. There are two courses that go over features that are related to integration development. They are very helpful. They also teach how to develop an integration solution, so it is an interesting program.

Additionally, explore the IBM blog about Integration Bus and App-Connect. You can find there a lot of integration patterns.

Other Integration solutions require an application server, but with IBM Integration Bus, it doesn't require a special application server.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution is to integrate different applications into the aviation area.

We have an on-premises deployment.

The whole of the radar data that we receive from the ARPA (Automatic Radar Plotting Aid) is transformed by the IBM Integration bus.

This product provides a relatively easy way to develop integration solutions.

This solution has very good, high-availability features.

From a performance point of view, it's very good and it doesn't need very much in terms of CPU resources.

This product uses the PVU (Processor Value Unit) license model from IBM, and it is something that should be improved. It requires you to install monitoring software that ensures you are only using the number of CPUs that you have paid for. This license monitoring tool is very complicated. 

This solution is very stable.

We use this solution on a daily basis, and it is very, very important to us.

This solution is very scalable because there are different possibilities available when it comes to scaling it up.

We have two people who do the operating, and there are three to four people who are responsible for the development of the integrations.

I think that the support from IBM is very good for this solution. Usually, they answer very fast.

When I started at the facility, they were using CORBA (Common Object Request Broker) for the integration. It was used very intensively, and the project to introduce this solution was the replacement.

We had a consulting team from IBM on-site to perform the implementation. For the first three years, we had IBM consultants with us to guide us in the development and also in the operating of the solution.

Our licensing is based on a five-year contract, and as far as I know, there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fee.

We evaluated several similar products including solutions from Oracle and Software AG, and we chose this solution not only because of its technical features but also because of the on-site support that IBM gave us.

My advice for anybody implementing this solution for the first time is to have people from IBM on-site to help you establish the operating procedures and the development procedures.

My understanding is that the new release will have a lot of new features, including support for Docker containers. At this point, I don't have any requirements for the new release. It has also been rebranded.

This is a good solution from a technical and operational point of view, but they should really remove this technically complicated license controlling. It is very complicated software that you have to install.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The IBM Integration Bus platform is Advanced Enterprise service bus , Typically used in SOA Environments . with newer version it can work it container based platforms and can be used to implement Micro services.

We have implemented IIB/WMB Based Solution in multiple organizations helping them to adopt Service oriented architecture , and eliminating point to point integrations.

IIB helped our clients having clean Overall solution , doing decoupling between different systems , eliminating duplicate point to point integration points . replacing legacy integration products ,and having high performing stable trouble free Enterprise service bus

IIB is feature rich product it is hard to point to a single feature , but most important is IIB supports most communication protocols out the box (SOAP/REST/HTTP/MQ/JMS/TCP/Files) 

Native support of Asynchronous calls .  support of multiple message formats (XML/JSON/ CWF/CSF/SWIFT/HL7....)

Global Transaction Co-ordination

Horizontal and Vertical Scalability .

It would be better with more API management features. 

More Micro-service and container based support. IBM is already working on it on Version 11, but it still needs improvement. 

Also IIB have cloud version ,it is doesn't have all features of the On premise version , and needs more improvement . 

IBM Integration Bus is almost perfect in terms of stability.

We can easily do the required scalability with IBM Integration Bus. We have never faced an issue. Plus, it is very straightforward.

I didn't need to contact IBM technical support very much.

In older versions, the setup was very complex. In recent releases, it's been very straightforward.

 I am working in a consultancy company. We install this for most of our clients. We develop services for them using it.

IIB very flexible.nearly limitless , You can easily overload it with duties that it's not meant to hold. Organizations needs to have strong their architecture team and SOA governance during and After implementation .to avoid overloading the ESB Layer.

I would give IBM Integration Bus an 11 out of 10. I have tried solutions from competitors Brands. There is no comparison.