We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and IBM WebSphere Message Broker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The system's stability is the most valuable feature."
"REST API design and development support are useful. Building and exposing APIs using GUI API designer with editor makes implementation a breeze."
"My favorite feature is the XML-based DFDL mapping, which is a tool that allows you to graphically map legacy data formats to modern data formats."
"This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"The solution addresses all of our middleware needs in respect of transformation, parsing, security and stability; everything really."
"I have found the inbound and outbound adapter confirmations valuable."
"The message queue, like, message queue connectors. Then they have a built in connectors for most of the systems, like SAP, oracle database, and this Civil connector is there. Of course, we have this SQL database connector So those built in connectors are there. For the almost most of the systems, we have built in connectors. And second thing is that it is a stateless Integration, so it doesn't maintain a state of the integration. Bus the Stitches Integration makes it very fast."
"The solution has good integration."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"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 transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"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."
"The solution is complex and there is a need for more resources and greatly improved quality."
"I would like to be able to build an Integration Bus cluster that is active-active."
"The product lacks an integrated testing module."
"I would rate the support from IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten. They are very helpful but sometimes it takes too long for them to respond."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"I don't mind the pricing."
"IBM could improve its connectivity."
"IBM does not support orchestration, which is how they designed it, and other BPM tools in the market support orchestration. If they merged the BPM capability into this product, then it would be a better solution."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 65 reviews while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". 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 Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, webMethods Integration Server, Oracle Service Bus, IBM DataPower Gateway and Red Hat Fuse, whereas IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and Red Hat Fuse. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.