We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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."Its Analytics is the most valuable feature."
"The solution offers great notifications."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of IBM BPM."
"The Process Designer is good. We like how we can drag and drop and link the processes up, that works out great for us."
"The solution has helped us automate business processes."
"It provides a very robust environment to build an integration framework or workflow patterns that we have. A lot of changes or modifications have been made to this solution over the past few years. The features that they have added this time have helped developers like us to work on the developmental environment and leverage all the capabilities of the tool. This is what I like about this solution."
"It is being able to see the process, and understanding what the process is versus having to bury it in code somewhere."
"It is easy to take a requirement, put it in the code, and deploy it."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The solution has good integration."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"Better integration with other products in the automation suite."
"Integration with web services, especially in the standard version of the product."
"Our developers are complaining that it's too complex to maintain."
"We would like better performance and more visibility on each step of the tool."
"The integration could be improved."
"We still have a couple of issues that we are working on right now with stability. Mostly on the configuration side of the tool, and it has been about a month that we have been working to stabilize the platform."
"IBM BPM lacks openness, that is, the ability to become open for new options in terms of APIs, front-end development, and ecosystem. IBM BPM has been quite closed. One of the main improvements would be to somehow embed the rules engine into IBM BPM. Merging IBM BRMS and the rules engine with IBM BPM would be helpful. If there was some simpler way to define rules without having to put IBM BRMS on top of it, it would be good. It's something that we can get out of Camunda but not out of IBM BPM."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
IBM BPM is ranked 7th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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 Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and Red Hat Fuse. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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.