Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
2018-11-22T10:29:00Z
Miriam Tover - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
  • 0
  • 16

What do you like most about Red Hat Fuse?

Hi Everyone,

What do you like most about Red Hat Fuse?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with the community!

12
PeerSpot user
12 Answers
MB
Senior Engeneer
MSP
Top 5
2022-07-20T11:15:36Z
20 July 22

Red Hat Fuse's best features are that it's very easy to set up and maintain.

CM
Integration Consultant at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2022-06-17T19:30:00Z
17 June 22

The solution has more tooling and options.

AbhishekKumar8 - PeerSpot reviewer
Co-Founder at BeatO
Real User
Top 20
2022-05-15T16:49:26Z
15 May 22

The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution.

Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution.

AwaisOmer - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Integration Engineer at Systems Limited
Real User
Top 20
2022-01-19T12:43:00Z
19 January 22

Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly.

NN
Manager at a energy/utilities company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2021-11-25T20:09:00Z
25 November 21

More than a feature, I would say that the reliability of the platform is the most valuable aspect.

NP
Manager of Integration Services at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
2021-11-09T21:23:00Z
09 November 21

This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly.

Learn what your peers think about Red Hat Fuse. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Woo Joo Lee - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
2021-11-08T13:41:00Z
08 November 21

The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing.

CF
VP at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
2020-12-24T12:29:00Z
24 December 20

The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default setting.

JuanArtola - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Solution Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
2020-11-05T06:31:00Z
05 November 20

We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data.

GR
Senior IT Architect at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-09-03T07:49:50Z
03 September 20

The most valuable feature is the software development environment.

DP
Solution Architect at AppValue
Real User
2019-08-12T05:55:00Z
12 August 19

The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable.

it_user938778 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2018-11-22T10:29:00Z
22 November 18

I found it was quite easy to set up and implement.

Related Questions
AS
User at Nuvision Consulting
Jan 26, 2022
Hi, I'm working at a consulting company and I want to understand the pros and the cons of Red Hat Fuse vs webMethods Integration Server. Please advise. 
See 2 answers
Dave Koffij - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Architect, Cloud and Security at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
29 July 21
With webMethods Integration Server, you have the power to connect anything faster, thanks to open, standards-based integration. Make custom, packaged and mainframe applications and databases—on-premises and in the cloud—interoperable and assure the fluid flow of data across your automated processes. Mapping and transformation functions are built-in. pro's; Easy scalability, 300+ connectors, Faster integrations, "Lift & shift" integrations, Mapping and transformation & iPaaS integrations in the cloud Where Red Hat Fuse, pros; Hybrid deployment, Built-in iPaaS with low-code UI/UX, Container-based integration & Integration everywhere supporting 200 included connectors. Red Hat Fuse, based on open source communities like Apache Camel and Apache ActiveMQ, is part of an agile integration solution. Its distributed approach allows teams to deploy integrated services where required. The API-centric, container-based architecture decouples services so they can be created, extended, and deployed independently.
PaulPerez - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration Architect at Pymma consulting
26 January 22
Hello Andhika Please read Dave's reply first and understand that WebMethods offers many features that you will not find in RedHat Fuse. I would like to add one more architectural point of view. WebMethods provides a nice business process engine that helps you orchestrate your services. Fuse is not able to provide this kind of service.  If your processes are simple and map information, for example, use Fuse.  If your business processes are complex and require balancing, I recommend an integration tool with a business process engine (BPEL or BPMN). WebMethods, Oracle SOA Suite or OpenESB offer these types of tools.  If you plan to design complex processes, you should not hesitate to choose WebMethods.
MichaelSukachev - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Enterprise Architect at Teranet Inc.
Nov 05, 2017
Hello All, When I'm comparing the ROI for 3 years (licensing only) between Biztalk Server Enterprise Edition and Mule it looks like Biztalk is a good option I'm looking to find specific cons/pros on features, reliability and maintainability . Thanks.
2 out of 17 answers
PeerSpot user
Ingeniero de Sistemas at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
30 October 17
I prefer Mule because BizTalk too much expensive and the free technologies it's the present, but the trouble it's the support at it's more expensive
PeerSpot user
Specialist Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
30 October 17
BizTalk cannot be considered as an ESB (more like EAI/MOM) Depending on the requirements, but general speaking, i would opt by for Mule ( AnyPoint) because is more inline with SOA requirements, ESB patterns, ... Regards Miguel Anselmo
Related Solutions
Download Free Report
Download our free Red Hat Fuse Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
DOWNLOAD NOW
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.