We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and IBM WebSphere Application Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The designer feature, compared to other solutions is easy to use."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"This is one of the best tools to support the business and the way we work, and the numerous processes we need to implement."
"One thing that I love about them is that they make it easier to integrate with other systems, especially with the use of smaller files."
"We have used a lot of out-of-the-box reporting on the process performance metrics. We have been able to make suggested changes to staff for this role or streamlining by eliminate some activities where people were not requiring a lot of work in the first place."
"It's a solid product. It covers most of the pain points for clients."
"It is transparent to business users because it is mostly picture based modelling."
"IBM's deployment box is one huge black box. We can create all the services with our own code or without a codebase, however, we have a huge amount of space with practically no limitation."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is the best in terms of scalability and performance, as well as the support for managing distributed transactions."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Portal Virtualization."
"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"IBM WAS is the backbone for our enterprise content management suite which delivers the primary processes for our customers. Without a good application server, it would be hard to provide a secure layer of midddleware upon which the other applications run. IBM WAS improves the stability of the entire solution and provides a high quality platform for running web-based solutions."
"Starting with version 8, WAS provides a special folder called monitor deployment. Once you put the .war or .ear file in there, it is deployed automatically without human intervention. This greatly helps us in our continuous integration server. Once the deployment binary is ready, we write a script to copy it to that folder and then, voila! The application is up and running and accessible from its context root."
"The price and the overall installation process could be improved."
"It can definitely be improved in terms of performance and stability."
"We need process monitoring. It is somewhat complex to monitor all the processes which work."
"The integration could be improved."
"The constant switch between Eclipse and its web versions can be annoying and confusing."
"I hope IBM uses something from IBM Content Navigator to make the interface easier to navigate."
"IBM BPM needs to have a better and modified interface."
"Except for the Lucene the index - we had a couple of issues in the Process Portal where the Lucene index went out of sync, and we had to work at least 15 - 20 hours to have it back in sync with the database."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"The solution consumes hardware."
"The installation has room for improvement."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product."
"What could be improved in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its interconnection with other products, for example, Kafka. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is a better graphical user interface."
"When we run into memory or locking issues, we resort to using third-party tools. However, it would be preferable to have native tools for debugging this type of problem."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM BPM is ranked 7th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Nintex Process Platform, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and IBM DataPower Gateway. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.