We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and IBM BPM 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 solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The control panel is very easy to navigate. It's similar to most hosting platforms, so it's user-friendly. Once you get used to it, managing your hosting becomes easy, too."
"It is scalable."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"Responsive Portal + Process Federation Server. This set of solutions offers a unified worklist to our customers."
"This solution has always been lacking in the user interface (UI), it needed to be improved a lot. However, from the acquisition of Spark UI, the UI is much better. Overall the solution is robust and has the ability to integrate with any product for complex workflows."
"Overall, I'm satisfied with the product. If you compare it with other products, it's probably not as easygoing or as simple to implement as the rest. But after you get used to it, it works. It has a lot of capabilities and potential, but the people, who come from different technologies, have some difficulty getting used to the way of working with IBM products."
"One of the most notable things is how you can develop use cases with the customers, internal customers, but directly within. The software process model that BPM supports is really exciting in that aspect."
"We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to customize your rules and put them inside the tool."
"We are implementing the tool to triple our monthly transaction volume."
"Some of the features that I like the most are team management and process performance. They are both very useful and very powerful with regard to the workflow."
"There is a security-related problem that depends on the web server's configuration."
"The major issue occurs with ports. So, I would like to see easier port management."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"Adding a reverse proxy to Apache Web Server would be a significant improvement."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"It is a rather thick stack because you have to have WebSphere skills, IBM BPM skills, and an understanding of how the product runs on WebSphere. A lot of this will start to get a lot easier as they put it in containers, which will allow the platform to manage itself in some regards."
"The product is extremely complex to use and administrate."
"One of the things that we are looking at is cognitive learning. IBM has another product called IBM RPA, I think, which is doing some of that stuff. We would like to see more of that with respect to cognitive learning and AI put back into the process engine to help."
"The constant switch between Eclipse and its web versions can be annoying and confusing."
"They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data."
"The price and the overall installation process could be improved."
"It is not user-friendly."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, NGINX Plus, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework and Zend PHP Engine, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow. See our Apache Web Server vs. IBM BPM 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.
