We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and Red Hat Fuse 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."Facilitates communication between parties and legacy systems."
"We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"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 most valuable feature is that it's robust and its time to market is very short."
"Web interface, REST API for viewing services, admin, stats, and deployment are premium features, which makes IIB stand among its competition."
"The solution's features are all quite useful. We use all of them."
"Promotes the reuse of developed resources to more efficiently consume resources."
"I have found the inbound and outbound adapter confirmations valuable."
"With a premium, one can get support 24 hours."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default setting."
"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"We decided to move away from IBM Integration Bus for IT technical refreshments."
"Storage capacity of the product should be addressed."
"IBM Integration Bus isn't particularly user-friendly and has a big learning curve."
"The memory footprint should be minimized."
"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."
"Performance can be an issue sometimes. The tool occasionally crashes due to memory-related problems. We've reported these issues to IBM, and they are actively working on improving the tooling experience."
"It provides all the features that are required for day-to-day work. So far, I haven't seen any major issues that impact our work. I have been told that IBM App Connect Enterprise, which is the next version of IIB, is really good. It is better than IIB, and it gives you more coverage in terms of application integration."
"The solution is complex and there is a need for more resources and greatly improved quality."
"While it's a good platform, the pricing is a bit high."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."
"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"The monitoring experience should be better."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 63 reviews while Red Hat Fuse is ranked 4th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 23 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, JBoss ESB and webMethods Integration Server. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse 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.
