We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and IBM WebSphere Application Server 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 is scalable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"The most significant advantage is the ability to swiftly enable HTTPS services when my DNS is configured correctly."
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"The solution offers good security."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"Security: It is compatible with the latest Java 8 security features, supports FIPS 140-2 and NIST SP 800-53 with strong ciphers and cryptography keys, and supports TLS 1.2 completely. Also, configuring client and server certificates is relatively easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Portal Virtualization."
"The solution is very stable and robust."
"Ease of administration: It has an Integrated Solutions Console, what we call the administrative console, with very detailed configurations and Help pages for each configurable item."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"The only reason why we're currently using WebSphere is that the integration of the authentication with Azure is very quick. WebSphere has something that can immediately connect with Azure Active Directory."
"The performance is good."
"One of the most valuable features might be the stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server."
"Adding a reverse proxy to Apache Web Server would be a significant 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."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"The major issue occurs with ports. So, I would like to see easier port management."
"A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system."
"By optimizing the infrastructure to allow the webserver to directly handle queries from memory—particularly by prioritizing the storage of queries in memory and processing them through the web server interface—I could potentially cut down the required instances from five hundred to two hundred."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"IBM needs to pay attention to market changes more quickly. We now have Java 9 and very soon Java EE8. We do not want to wait for two or three years after their release until they are supported by the new version."
"The installation has room for improvement."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"The licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
"Based on the field and based on the build that was provided, we've noticed a lot of constraints in terms of the performance now."
"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while IBM WebSphere Application Server 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 WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, NGINX Plus, Microsoft .NET Framework, Zend PHP Engine and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and IIS. See our Apache Web Server vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server 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.