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."Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"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."
"Agility is the key. It gives our customers a faster way to be able to implement processes, get ownership of task, visibility into a process. The ability to modify that process, optimize that process over time, is probably the biggest benefit that they get from the software."
"The Process Designer is good. We like how we can drag and drop and link the processes up, that works out great for us."
"There is information during the process that the analyst will look at, their procedures. We created a part of the application such that the business can change those procedures as needed, on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. As the reps go through the process, they don't necessarily know it's changing, they just know they have to refer to some documentation, and the business can keep that up to date."
"We are implementing the tool to triple our monthly transaction volume."
"Its Analytics is the most valuable feature."
"I like the APIs and the BPM coach is a good tool. But if I had to pick one, it would be the API."
"IBM BPM is a stable solution."
"It helps improve your process through continual measurement."
"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."
"Adding a reverse proxy to Apache Web Server would be a significant improvement."
"In future releases, I would like to see better server optimization."
"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."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"There is a security-related problem that depends on the web server's configuration."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"Stability wavers. We have some opportunities for improvement in this space, especially as we approach our target volume of a million transactions a day. It is tough, because it is not necessarily the product. It is more around the platform and infrastructure to support it, so the connectivity to the database, web sessions, and reverse proxies in front of that."
"Importing and exporting between multiple environments is more difficult with other tools."
"Process versioning was tricky, not straightforward."
"Process Server is no more available than new products out there, but in general IBM has a high cost and complex setup."
"The people working on the front desk are having some problem with managing the documentation. For instance, they get a picture, and if the picture comes rotated 90 degrees, together with a picture that is not rotated, they have some problems dealing with that, technically. There are some minor aspects that on the usability side that are still lacking. That has to do with FileNet, too, I'm talking about the suite together."
"The initial setup was complex."
"This is technology, and there's always room for improvement. It would be better to have a single solution. Trying to have an overview in terms of this solution brings together the concepts of BPM processes, customer journeys, and an automation part for KPIs. All of this working together and coming up with a single solution with privacy is more commercial than anything else."
"The solution can improve integration with SAP, CRM, and Salesforce, which is not capital-intensive."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while IBM BPM is ranked 7th 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, Pega BPM, Appian, 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.