We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and IBM BPM 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."The control panel is very easy to navigate. It's similar to most hosting platforms, so it's user-friendly. Once you get used to it, managing your hosting becomes easy, too."
"The most significant advantage is the ability to swiftly enable HTTPS services when my DNS is configured correctly."
"The solution offers good security."
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"It's very stable, and it hosts one of the biggest of many biggest web applications in the world."
"It is scalable."
"It makes the company business processes work more efficiently."
"This solution has always been lacking in the user interface (UI), it needed to be improved a lot. However, from the acquisition of Spark UI, the UI is much better. Overall the solution is robust and has the ability to integrate with any product for complex workflows."
"I think the best way it can be it improved, is to make it easier to install. It's a very complicated piece of software, and there are a lot of things you have to do to get it set up. It's not just running an installer. You install WebSphere. You install the BPM product, and there's a large host of other steps you have to do: run queries against the database, you have to manually configure a bunch of properties files for your environment. I think if they could streamline all that, so it wasn't a considerable effort to install, that would be very useful. Because from an engineering point of view, you want to spend as little time as possible actually installing a product."
"Scalability is good. In the time that I have been there, we have added more JVMs to help with the increased workload, so it does scale."
"Setting it up is fairly easy. If somebody has knowledge of the system, he or she will be able to do it fairly quickly."
"We made the transformation to agile. Altogether with BPM, it is the total package."
"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."
"It is a stale solution."
"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"The major issue occurs with ports. So, I would like to see easier port management."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."
"Adding a reverse proxy to Apache Web Server would be a significant improvement."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."
"I'm hearing things might be improving, to really deliver on BPM as opposed to simply workflow. That really should be emphasized a lot more than it has been, because a lot of customers will simply implement the process and leave it there, because the product maybe doesn't emphasize BPM as much as it should, as much as maybe they talk about it in the sales process. The whole idea of BPM, is to iteratively improve the process, and in order to do that you have to have the analytics tool with it. A lot of times that doesn't go as far as it should simply because there's a lot more work to be done for that to happen, and just some sort of technical limitations that don't make that as easy as it should be."
"The configuration is not that easy, and the initial deployment took three months."
"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."
"The analysis reports could be much better."
"We need process monitoring. It is somewhat complex to monitor all the processes which work."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"Performance on large scale requirements could also be improved."
"Finding errors and bugs on the system is not easy. We can't seem to use the events or logs to find them, so it makes it difficult to debug the system. They really need to work on their debugging features to make is much, much easier. It would improve the solution considerably and should be something they add in a future release."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while IBM BPM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, NGINX Plus, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework and Zend PHP Engine, whereas IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow. See our Apache Web Server vs. IBM BPM 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.