IBM WebSphere Application Server Review

Valuable connection management and scalability but is quite expensive

What is our primary use case?

We have some services which are doubled up using Java. To deploy this research we are using the WebSphere Application Server. A lot of channel applications are consuming these services in particular.

What is most valuable?

The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable.

What needs improvement?

Nowadays the industry is moving towards a more open-source operating framework.

The cost factor is huge. It's very pricey compared to other open-source stacks. In the future, we'll deal with the IBM Stack so we might move to a compact server and other open-source alternatives which are comparatively less in terms of cost.

They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product.

The solution would benefit from having a different licensing model.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for 12 to 14 years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution's scalability is good, but there is a cost factor, which is a disappointing element. If you want to go for another node then you have to go pull up that code license model, and that produces another licensing cost.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've reached out to technical support. I find them good, but not excellent. They aren't very quick to respond.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using WebLogic BL as our stack. Now we use an IBM Stack. It was about eight years ago when we switched, so we've been using IBM for a while now.

How was the initial setup?

Depending on which platform you are on, the initial setup isn't too complex.

Currently, it is all straightforward, but it should be where the next generation of container-based, docker-based is and it's not there yet. Everyone wants that type of compatibility.

Deployment takes about two to three hours.

What about the implementation team?

We have our in-house team who are trained in the deployment of IBM WebSphere Application Servers, so we didn't need outside assistance. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution is very expensive compared to an open-source stack.

What other advice do I have?

The solution is deployed in the UX operating system.

Although the solution is good, open-source options keep getting better and better, so I'd recommend others to look into that. This solution is expensive. So is Oracle. I find open-source more innovative and they often have a good community around them that offers helpful support.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, but there are basic features that have minimum capabilities that can be very dissatisfying. Apart from that, they provide good support, offer a good clustering model that's reliable, and it's properly tested with certified code.

Which version of this solution are you currently using?

**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More IBM WebSphere Application Server reviews from users
...who work at a Government
...who compared it with Oracle Application Server
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Red Hat, Apache and others in Application Server. Updated: March 2021.
474,038 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment