We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and Microsoft .NET Framework 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's a solid product. It covers most of the pain points for clients."
"IBM BPM is a stable solution."
"This solution is very stable."
"We made the transformation to agile. Altogether with BPM, it is the total package."
"The solution offers great notifications."
"IBM BPM's most valuable features are its speed in implementing and providing any changes."
"Technical support is good. They are very responsive. It is usually me who takes more time to get back to them than they take to get back to me, which is good."
"The solution has helped us automate business processes."
"Pre-programmed functions for .NET Framework are widely available."
"When we talk about .NET development, we use Visual Studio IDE to create these things. In recent years, there have been a lot of improvements in Visual Studio 2022. It would be a daunting task to list all of the features that have benefited us, as it would require a lot of time and effort. However, there are definitely many improvements year after year in .NET development."
"The web development and Microsoft Windows service development capabilities are among the most valuable features offered by the Microsoft .NET Framework. This language platform is highly user-friendly, with plenty of online examples and information available, as well as a robust development environment."
"The most valuable feature is customization."
"Microsoft .NET Framework continually innovates, particularly in Visual Studio, which focuses on improving languages, debugging, and .NET functionality."
"The .NET framework is a mature platform that is very helpful and saves time during the software development process."
"Firstly, I appreciate the decision to use Microsoft .NET Framework. I find it to be an excellent language, with a history rooted in providing an alternative to Java, albeit with initial challenges. It is gaining popularity and may be voted the most desirable programming language. What I particularly like about .NET is its language efficiency. While C# is the primary language, the platform also supports others, catering to those inclined towards functional programming. Although I started with Shell, I'm still grasping the concept of functional programming. Despite initial reservations about object-oriented programming, I acknowledge its advantages. .NET is a safer option, and despite criticisms, it has evolved over the years. One notable aspect is .NET's transition to an open platform in recent years, distancing itself from being exclusive to Microsoft engineers. I appreciate the versatility of .NET, enabling code production for a wide range of platforms, presenting a strong competition to Java. It allows targeting practically any physical platform, showcasing its flexibility. These qualities contribute to my positive view of .NET, totaling thirteen aspects that I find appealing."
"The technology is very scalable and accessible to use."
"They should incorporate an API gateway functionality within it to simplify integrations."
"The stability varies because it involves a lot of other components like databases, so sometimes if something goes wrong there, it can't recover from the fatal errors."
"New users will need at least six months to get comfortable with IBM BPM, at least initially. So, there's a learning curve."
"The engine itself tends to accumulate a lot of data that needs to be cleaned up, and that's the kind of thing that keeps it from, in some scenarios, scaling as much as it needs to. And then, when you're building solutions, if you're not careful to keep the screens from being associated with too much data, if you're going to just do things the way that a lot of people would just assume that they can do, without having experience of having made those mistakes before, it will accumulate a lot of data, and that will cause it to perform very badly."
"Could increase vulnerability and security patches to make it more robust."
"The constant switch between Eclipse and its web versions can be annoying and confusing."
"The initial setup process is complex for basic users."
"I would like to see more inclusion of RPA technologies. If we have more manual processes, we can use robotic process automation and integrate that in with the solution."
"The integration with DevOps tools, such as Azure DevOps, Jira, and GitLab, would be a valuable addition."
"The solution is difficult to learn if someone is learning it for the first time."
"If AI could be incorporated in Microsoft .NET Framework it would be helpful."
"The product is nearing its sunset, and we think that by 2028, we won't get support anymore"
"The integration could improve in Microsoft .NET Framework."
"The learning curve could be improved."
"This solution should include Power BI so that we don't have to use any third-party tools."
"Improvements are needed in .NET development, particularly in a backend scenario."
IBM BPM is ranked 7th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Pega BPM, Appian, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Apache Web Server and IBM DataPower Gateway. See our IBM BPM vs. Microsoft .NET Framework 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.