We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and Oracle Fusion Middleware 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."One of the most valuable features might be the stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server."
"The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"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."
"High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license."
"IBM WAS is extremely scalable. It is easy to add additional servers and to divide the load over servers in all kinds of ways."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Portal Virtualization."
"The initial setup is easy. There are many self-tutorial videos are on the Internet, and then the Oracle documents are self-explanatory."
"Oracle Service Bus is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"The scalability is good."
"Data integrity."
"The solution is extendable so you can start with two cores and add more at any time."
"Fusion Middleware's main feature for me is that it is quite flexible, and, as middleware, it provides us with all sorts of technology and application adapters, which makes it very handy to use."
"Oracle Fusion is stable."
"It is really good in terms of features, and it is stable."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"The solution consumes hardware."
"When compared with WebLogic, Weblogic is lighter and consumes less memory."
"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
"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 licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
"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."
"The product should improve BPEL features."
"One thing that I would like to see is if this product can be containerized. We are moving away from virtual servers and moving more towards containerization to be able to quickly set up environments or have the flexibility of scaling them. It would be good if it can be containerized, and it works well in containerized platforms."
"Technical support should resolve issues more quickly."
"Its price can be improved. We are currently looking for more cost-efficiency. It should also have a little bit more flexibility for customizations. The customizations should be quicker."
"The price could always be better."
"All areas of HCM modules could use some improvement."
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten because we did have multiple breakdowns and crashes."
"The main improvement must be made on the user interface. You need to use another Oracle cross in this product. It must be improved and some features of the connectors must be changed."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Server with 26 reviews while Oracle Fusion Middleware is ranked 6th in Application Server with 12 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Oracle Fusion Middleware is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Fusion Middleware writes "Maintains top database performance and includes a very good ATB feature". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and Oracle GlassFish, whereas Oracle Fusion Middleware is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, Tomcat, IIS, JBoss and TIBCO ActiveMatrix. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Oracle Fusion Middleware 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.