We performed a comparison between Fiorano ESB and IBM Integration Bus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, MuleSoft, Software AG and others in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)."One of the most valuable features is the scalability. Whenever it's required, we can add more servers and scale. We can actually use specific servers for specific stuff. Unlike in other solutions, now we can implement one server purely dedicated to core-banking-related API. This is very important when it comes to the PCI DSS certification."
"The platform's most valuable feature is data transformation."
"The ability to compliment out-of-the-box integration components with small custom code."
"I found all features valuable. There are a lot of connectors."
"The multi-approach and the multi-capabilities are valuable."
"What I like best are the monitoring features."
"Seamlessly integrates your different applications."
"Easy to understand documentation with a huge list of examples and tutorials."
"It's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle."
"I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things. The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good."
"The features I have found most valuable in this solution are transformation and routing."
"Error logging is not very user-friendly. It requires the error logging to be configured in many different places."
"Fiorano ESB could be improved by becoming more user-friendly. Most of the pages and generated reports on API usage are already there, but they could be more user-friendly. There could be more selections added to generate reports. Overall, though, Fiorano suits all our needs and has good functionality."
"Fiorano ESB's logging feature and data availability need improvement."
"I think security should be more simplified."
"The next versions are moving toward container use. It would be a shame to make the product highly complex just to support one pattern of deployment. It is my hope that IBM continues to focus on practical functionality that is simple and cost-effective."
"I would like to be able to build an Integration Bus cluster that is active-active."
"The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"One drawback that I have found is that there are issues with using the Java connector."
"Migrating to this solution is complex and it would be helpful if they had a way to convert existing integrations."
"IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box."
"The performance needs to be enhanced when working with the Toolkit."
Fiorano ESB is ranked 10th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 5 reviews while IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 63 reviews. Fiorano ESB is rated 9.0, while IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fiorano ESB writes "Scalable and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". Fiorano ESB is most compared with Mule ESB and Oracle Service Bus, whereas IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server and JBoss ESB.
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.