We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Azul Zulu vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, F5 and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: October 2021.
552,136 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
"We used to pay about $100,000-$120,000 US or somewhere around there. That was a bit cost-prohibitive for us to continue.""The price of IBM WebSphere Application Server could be less expensive and there is an annual license required for this solution.""We pay around $200,000 annually.""It is very expensive.""The price of this product is higher than that of competitors."

More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
552,136 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: The price of IBM WebSphere Application Server could be less expensive and there is an annual license required for this solution.
Top Answer: The solution could improve the integration.
Ranking
Views
1,115
Comparisons
1,007
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Views
5,239
Comparisons
4,220
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
592
Rating
7.1
Comparisons
Also Known As
WebSphere Application Server
Learn More
Overview

Zulu is a 100% open source certified build of OpenJDK, running on Linux, Windows, and OS X. Zulu complies with the Java SE standard for Java SE 8, 7, and 6. Free to download and use, Zulu is available on Azure, AWS, Canonical’s Charm Store and the Docker hub. Zulu Enterprise subscriptions deliver 24 x 7 x 365 access to Azul’s Support team.

IBM WebSphere Application Server provides a range of flexible, secure, Java EE 7 runtime environments available on premises or across any public, private or hybrid cloud.
Offer
Learn more about Azul Zulu
Learn more about IBM WebSphere Application Server
Sample Customers
Microsoft, Kyocera, OKI, Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise, Voya Financial
TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm15%
Government7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm27%
Computer Software Company18%
Government18%
Manufacturing Company18%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider16%
Insurance Company5%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise61%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, F5 and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: October 2021.
552,136 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Azul Zulu is ranked 20th in Application Infrastructure while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 8 reviews. Azul Zulu is rated 0.0, while IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.2. On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Bad documentation, does not scale well, and has a lot of complexities". Azul Zulu is most compared with Azul Zing, Oracle Hotspot, WebLogic Suite, Zulu Embedded and Oracle SOA Suite, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with Tomcat, JBoss, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Oracle WebLogic Server and IBM BPM.

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.