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."The most valuable thing is the loose coupling and making the change in only one stack of the ESB layer or the middleware layer."
"The message queue feature is very valuable."
"We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"Facilitates communication between parties and legacy systems."
"This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn."
"Promotes the reuse of developed resources to more efficiently consume resources."
"IBM Integration Bus is a very strong tool."
"I am into microservices using Java Spring Boot, but if we are using legacy systems, IBM Integration Bus is very good for them. They have their own computational logic called EC12, their own proprietary language. You can do any kind of complex logic and can implement other ESVs that I have seen."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"More than a feature, I would say that the reliability of the platform is the most valuable aspect."
"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"The solution has more tooling and options."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"Red Hat Fuse's best features are that it's very easy to set up and maintain."
"I would like to be able to run and install this solution on different platforms."
"Some of the runtime properties need to be improved because if you want to load certificates as sales security, you have to restart the server."
"The solution is complex and there is a need for more resources and greatly improved quality."
"We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support."
"The product does not provide API management."
"Current aggregation implementation should be deprecated. MQ independent, as well as an intuitive solution, should be proposed."
"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 could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."
"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."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 65 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, webMethods Integration Server, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, webMethods Integration Server and JBoss ESB. 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.
