Tomcat alternatives and competitors

I am using the solution to study and have not yet used it on a production level. I integrate components such as other Oracle products and the public cloud. I also use the solution on the virtual side to try different approaches. I use the on-premises version but my company also has the public cloud version. 

Here in Botswana, we are still lagging behind in technology. People are still in the dark about the cloud so it will take some time. It is important to learn and Oracle provides free cloud training. I am leveraging the training opportunities so that I get good experience. 

We have 500 users at our company. We specialize in tax regulation and administer the taxes for the country. There are quite a number of departments who use the solution including HR and payroll. When the need arrives, we can easily scale up. 

The solution's main benefit is its convenience. Other OEMs can take quite some time to deploy. With the solution, a bit of knowledge allows you to easily deploy without any issues.

The integration is very good, particularly with other Oracle products such as EDS. 

The OEM is quite broad and allows you to work on various things. 

The solution is quite good for applying patches or performing upgrades. 

The documentation might not be good enough for new users. You will sometimes experience hardships in accomplishing implementations because you don't yet have a grasp of the solution. Once you understand deployments, then implementations are easy with no real problems. 

Deployments for other vendors could be easier. The solution handles Oracle to Oracle very well, but needs to improve for vendors like Microsoft. Our last deployment with another vendor was a headache. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is mostly stable. Proper deployments run for a very long time without issues. We didn't do a few things properly so had a few issues at first. In the long run, the solution is stable and rated an eight out of ten. 

The solution is scalable so I rate scalability an eight out of ten. 

Technical support is an issue with Oracle so needs some improvement. They are very slow to respond and it might take one or two days to hear from them. They might pass you from one person to another to find someone knowledgeable and available. When support finally responds to an issue, they bring proper solutions. 

I rate support a six out of ten. 

Neutral

I have only used Oracle products. I have experience with Audit Vault, Database, Firewall, and NX. 

The setup is quite easy for the cloud version so I rate it a seven out of ten. 

The on-premises version takes quite a bit longer. You might spend a day or so on setup. 

Our team implemented both versions of the solution. Two or three engineers handle ongoing maintenance and any troubleshooting. It is good to share ideas and interact to overcome any problems. 

Clients set environments the way they want them, so deployment takes less time if they do that in advance. 

The solution is expensive so pricing is rated a six out of ten. 

Prices are broken down so you won't notice they are high. Over time, customers notice that the price is too high. 

In Botswana, customers are afraid to purchase the license because of the cost. Sometimes this is a lack of knowledge because customers don't realize what the license covers. We install trial versions so we can demonstrate the solution. Customers like it but start complaining when they receive purchase orders. 

The solution is particularly useful in a super structure with multiple vendors. I recommend the solution to most customers because it is really convenient and drastically reduces their workload. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We install Oracle products for our clients, not for our own purposes because we don't have any big infrastructure where we would have to deploy them.

Our clients' use-cases for Oracle WebLogic are for applications that require WebLogic as a server container for reports, for Java-based applications, for Oracle data integrators, and other tools which require WebLogic.

I have installed and configured WebLogic on-premises in cluster configurations as well as standalone configurations. I have also configured WebLogic on the Oracle cloud.

In WebLogic, the most useful feature is the UI administration console from where we can configure everything, such as security access, and where we can start and stop it graphically. That's the best feature of WebLogic Server.

In terms of what could be improved, maybe something related to the processes automation or starting and stopping the processes, because often WebLogic comes with something called Node Manager. Node Manager needs to be configured and administrated manually. That is kind of a setback because we don't how to configure it manually using scripting commands - it becomes complicated. In the next releases it would be good if it could be possible to have Node Manager WebLogic able to be configured and administrated graphically, also. That's a suggestion.

I have been using Oracle WebLogic Server for almost 10 years - from WebLogic version 10 onwards.

WebLogic is one of the web containers available today. We have installed it for more than 50 clients for different strategies using WebLogic.

Customer support is very good. It is a very standard product and any software product in the world comes with its own knicks and knacks that you have to know so that you can configure it. The documentation is very vast, but Oracle support for the product is very good. If there is any complication like a bug or if there is any complication with the configuration, the support is very good regarding that.

Today, WebLogic can be installed for different purposes. WebLogic Server can be installed alone just to publish Java-based applications or web-based applications - that is one scenario. Another scenario is to use WebLogic to deploy forms reports and other Oracle Fusion reports. For both the cases, the documentation is very good and the steps to follow are very standardized. It is basically straightforward.

In terms of how much staff is needed for implementation, one person specialized in installing WebLogic is required. But installing WebLogic also requires having enough knowledge about the operating systems, because, depending on the operating system, there needs to be an operating system administrator to configure certain features.

The WebLogic installation configuration requires top knowledge regarding operating systems and database design because, for example, when we deploy WebLogic for Fusion products we need to connect WebLogic to a database repository to deploy it later for the scripts. So one person is enough but this person requires knowledge of operating systems as well as databases.

The licensing costs for WebLogic depend on if you go with WebLogic Enterprise or WebLogic Suite. It's a complete suite of products that comes with WebLogic, like Fusion and other products. It is a bit costly.

If you go for WebLogic standard, which is just WebLogic by itself, it's not that costly. Price-wise it's a bit costly if you compare it to free products like JBoss or Tomcat. But if you compare it with other web server products which are commercial, WebLogic is not so costly.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Oracle WebLogic Server a nine.

We deploy the solution both on-premise and Azure, AWS, and IBM cloud.

We use a solution for our e-commerce application. We have an application deployed on AWS Cloud, for a client, which has a large B2B customer base in Australia. Therefore, we use WebSphere Application Server for the e-commerce website.

IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license. I have never encountered any issues when installing and deploying applications, as it never goes down.

Currently, there are two versions of WebSphere Application Server: the old version, known as WebSphere Application ND, and the newer version, Liberty, which is Docker-based. I have experience with both and have never encountered any issues. I believe that WebSphere Application Server is a great feature.

The cost of the solution is high and has room for improvement.

The installation has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for 12 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is very scalable. Every Application Server is scalable. Therefore, we will see that its architecture is the same as others.

If we compare the solution with JBoss, WebLogic, and Tomcat, we can see that they are different and the installation is more difficult than Tomcat. Tomcat is relatively straightforward, but with IBM WebSphere Application Server, we need to follow the steps provided by the product team at IBM. Therefore, the installation is more difficult. We have to configure each level and install the server within 30 minutes. The deployment manager and installation manager are included in the solution. We must install the installation manager, followed by the IBM JDK, and then the product itself.

The solution is quite expensive. Therefore, it is not suitable for small and medium businesses. The solution is more of an enterprise application. Large employers, such as those with a large customer base, TPS 100 to 200 plus, the banking sector, and the government sector, are better suited for this solution.

If an organization has fewer than 200 employees, it would not be suitable for them to use IBM WebSphere Application Server for their application, whether it is for internal or online use. IBM WebSphere Application Servers should only be considered if the organization has a concurrent load of 15,000 or more.

I give the solution an eight out of ten. The compatibility and stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server make it capable of supporting all applications. Additionally, the solution's features, applications, user interface, and support are all beneficial. When vulnerabilities arise, IBM provides quick fixes and support.

I work for a consulting company that has multiple clients. Most of our enterprise users prefer to use the WebSphere Application Server due to its stability, support, enhancements, and prompt support. This is why people tend to like IBM products.

JBoss is an on-premises solution we use in a banking setting.  It is used to manage servers and applications. There are two modes: domain and development. We can monitor and control all types of deployments in JBoss.

We have around 20,000 to 30,000 users on the same application and everything is going via the JBoss. We were using JBoss 1.0 when I first installed it, but they've probably included some more security patches in the latest version. 

We can deploy the applications on the JBoss server, so it is easy to manage. It's also easy to add new certificates to the config.

The documentation could be better. When we have questions, we need to check multiple websites. There isn't one place listing a set of common problems and how to fix them. 

I've been using JBoss since I joined the company three years ago. 

I haven't had any complaints in production, but in development and UAT, I've noticed that some of the applications are not deployed properly, and errors need to be fixed.

I used Tomcat when I worked for a cement manufacturer in India. They were a small-scale company, so we preferred Tomcat server. When I started working in finance, the bank suggested we go with JBoss. JBoss is easier to handle, and it can take on a much larger load compared to Tomcat.

Setting up JBoss is more complex relative to Tomcat. We need to follow the set of steps because it's not like we are installing a single system. Several separate systems need to be connected using the common prompt. There will be a common for that. After generating, we need to connect with the other ID with the main deployment controller.

There is one deployment controller, and we need to connect the separate server nodes using that. I use a trial-and-error process for the JBoss installations for the development. We follow the steps and document everything. After we do it once, it's not complex the second time because we know all the steps we need to follow. 

We don't use outside consultants. It's open source, so we do some R&D and a process of trial and error in the development environment. There is no help JBoss or a consultant. The banking team works with the development team to get it done.

I rate JBoss seven out of 10. I would recommend Tomcat for a small-scale use case. It's easy to maintain and deploy, and the UA interface is simple. JBoss is more appropriate for large industries. Though it is complex to maintain, JBoss is well balanced and can handle larger loads.