We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and JBoss based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it."
"Without the Admin Console it would be very hard to configure JVM settings, JDBC datasources, mail session settings, and security providers."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license."
"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"The scalability of the product is quite good."
"High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments."
"JBoss's configuration is straightforward and easy."
"The most valuable feature is the UI."
"The solution has flexibility and stability."
"The solution is easy to use."
"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 product integrates well with Java applications."
"The tool's most beneficial feature is its scalability. People with limited technical knowledge can quickly grasp its functions with a brief introduction. The tool's ease of use makes it a plug-and-play solution, reducing the effort required to train users on its usage."
"The support is fast and reliable."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"When compared with WebLogic, Weblogic is lighter and consumes less memory."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"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."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"The business logic side of it is sort of missing in the sense that if I want to track and measure velocity, it is not really available. You have to buy another application and embark on a separate implementation. Instead of having different licensing, IBM DataPower should be integrated with WebSphere. It will allow us to build the business layer and rules a lot more efficiently, rather than developing rules within the application. It would be good if we can set up the business layer through parametrization rather than development. IBM DataPower has the business rule and the controls, and if it can be integrated, it would be fantastic. It will help the application in working better in terms of security features and business logic. If you're going to use it for open banking, you will be able to monitor velocity on the total pricing."
"The installation has room for improvement."
"The login process could be improved."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"The tool's documentation could be improved to explain its usage and functionalities clearly. Having accessible documentation would save time for leaders like me when juniors seek information about it. The documentation should be self-explanatory and guide users on how to utilize the tool."
"In terms of monitoring, the old version was somewhat limited in flexibility, lacking the ability to easily adjust configurations."
"The price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product could be made cheaper."
"Sometimes the console has a glitch."
"Having the support combined with Red Hat support would be an improvement."
"The product could be cheaper."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Server with 26 reviews while JBoss is ranked 3rd in Application Server with 24 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while JBoss is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JBoss writes "A flexible and stable solution that is cost-efficient compared to other products". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, IBM BPM and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas JBoss is most compared with Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, IIS, Oracle GlassFish and TmaxSoft JEUS. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. JBoss report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.