We performed a comparison between JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and Zend PHP Engine 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."Stable and easy to handle in terms of hosting applications."
"The most valuable features of this solution are scalability and performance."
"Its technical support is excellent."
"It's convenient and barebone."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Scaling up is an important factor for large projects, and with PHP 7 and its performance improvements, this becomes even easier."
"The cache modules that Zend provides have been able to optimize and accelerate the loading of the pages when there was exponential growth in data volume and quantity of requests. At the same time, the monitoring console allowed us to have a real-time understanding of the resources and to make decisions when they were at the limit."
"The solution's initial setup process is easy."
"Zend Engine gives the flexibility to use external modules to easily expand the functionalities you need for your web project."
"Faster web app implementation, when PHP dev is required by customers."
"The Zend Framework provides an easy, open source way to produce coding based on the needs of our customers."
"We have not encountered issues with scalability as long as we effectively use caching to optimize performance of our web applications as well as a proper use of database connectivity."
"The fact that it is available open-source is the best feature."
"Its architecture needs improvement."
"Lacks some functional requirements."
"This solution needs better management UI."
"It's hard to find out the root cause of errors."
"A graphic user interface can be added."
"Zend PHP Engine needs to improve the loading time of its libraries and make it faster."
"The biggest problem with PHP is you have to write lot of conditions or have to use a framework."
"The main area that Zend needs to improve is to support asynchronous programming tasks, which is facilitated in PHP 7, but not at the same degree as HHVM."
"Its object oriented programming language needs improvement."
"The solution can be quicker."
"Integration of MVC with ORM tools for PHP is okay, but lacking a short list of decent ORM tools for PHP to choose from; there is ample room for improvement in both areas."
"A general scripting language should be further developed and should be embedded into it."
"In terms of improvement, it doesn't support concurrent processing. When we want to process anything on a concurrent basis, we have to divide it into a number of things, like a queue, or we have to run it using Cron jobs. We would like to have the capability to run any thread or process in parallel."
More JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is ranked 9th in Application Infrastructure with 5 reviews while Zend PHP Engine is ranked 12th in Application Infrastructure with 10 reviews. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is rated 9.0, while Zend PHP Engine is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of JBoss Enterprise Application Platform writes "A stable and scalable solution that provides excellent technical support with a good response time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zend PHP Engine writes "The fact that it is available open-source is the best feature". JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is most compared with IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework, Apache Web Server, IBM BPM and NGINX Plus, whereas Zend PHP Engine is most compared with Apache Web Server and NGINX Plus. See our JBoss Enterprise Application Platform vs. Zend PHP Engine 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.