We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and NGINX Plus 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."It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"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 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."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The best solution, by far, for web traffic control for things in production and just around the house."
"The product is resilient."
"The product is lightweight and fast."
"Nginx is extremely efficient in terms of the connection rate to the CPU cycles ratio, and in terms of the bandwidth to CPU cycles."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"I need to highlight that the number one thing about NGINX is that it is free."
"This solution has everything."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is simple to configure."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"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."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"NGINX is a very basic load balancer and cannot do as many customizations as F5."
"I would like it to have a more user-friendly graphical interface."
"NGINX Plus is moderately priced, but it could give better value for money."
"The scaling should be built into the software rather than configured from an outside source."
"The solution must improve its performance."
"The solution needs to be easier to setup and deploy."
"The user interface could be improved."
"It would be great if there was even more automation to make it even easier to maintain."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while NGINX Plus is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 28 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Apache Web Server. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. NGINX Plus 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.