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 multi-approach and the multi-capabilities are valuable."
"IBM Integration Bus has been effective in facilitating our messaging and service-oriented architecture (SOA) or bus architecture. So, we're already utilizing it to transform the data from the source it's sending. It converts the data from the format the source sends it into the format the destination system requires. So we are transforming the messages, which are required by the destination system; that's the one way."
"The product is a user-customized tool so that you can adjust it to your specific needs pretty well with little trouble."
"It allows us to avoid the need for consumers to understand multiple API protocols and security arrangements, and in some circumstances can reduce the impact of systems being unavailable."
"The most valuable feature is that it is clear and easy to learn."
"I have found the inbound and outbound adapter confirmations valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the API integration."
"What I like best are the monitoring features."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"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."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"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 solution has good integration."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"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."
"It would be beneficial for it to function more as an iPaaS, with the runtime available in the cloud, potentially on platforms like AWS, Azure, or Google Cloud."
"The tracing and debugging features are not up to date with more modern technology available."
"They need to come up with Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). It should also have a feature for integrating with those applications that are on the cloud."
"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."
"The password settings need improvement."
"We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support."
"The product lacks an integrated testing module."
"The price could be better. It would also be better if they simplified the code."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 63 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, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server, 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.