Compare IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server

IBM BPM is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 34 reviews while IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 7th in Application Infrastructure with 4 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 8.0, while IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "The most valuable feature is the Analytics, but more emphasis is needed on process improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Enables us to to integrate with IBM MQ and IBM Integration Bus, in a mixed Windows/AIX environment". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda BPM, ARIS BPM and Pega BPM, whereas IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, Tomcat and JBoss. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
391,932 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:

Pros
This solution has streamlined our operation and improved the TAT of sales, operations, and underwriters.This solution is very stable.It excels at analytics. It provides visibility across all activities of a company's processes and performance.It helps improve your process through continual measurement.It helps maintain, and in many instances, lower costs, as well as to maintain those costs, keeping them stable.It continues to keep up with the changing needs of the business. That is the strong value proposition of BPM. It's not a one-time automation.Provides the power to understand and automate processes.Our customers use the solution as a workflow platform to manage their processes.

Read more »

The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable.The most valuable feature of this solution is Portal Virtualization.High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments.Starting with version 8, WAS provides a special folder called monitor deployment. Once you put the .war or .ear file in there, it is deployed automatically without human intervention. This greatly helps us in our continuous integration server. Once the deployment binary is ready, we write a script to copy it to that folder and then, voila! The application is up and running and accessible from its context root.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.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.

Read more »

Cons
We care about technology and support because support is very important and a BPM is not easy to implement.I would like to see a lot more case studies.The user experience, while it has improved, should continue to improve.The business would like to use the product with a lot less IT and equipment involvement.Better integration with other products in the automation suite.Also, we would like to see integration with artificial intelligence, machine learning-type of technical capabilities. Right now, there are a lot Watson libraries out there. Building those integrations more, out-of-the-box, from IBM would be a good direction.I would like it more documentation during the design phase.We would appreciate more user-friendly definitions of processes with a more user-friendly interface for documenting processes.

Read more »

They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product.In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language.The footprint could be reduced so that we can use a smaller virtual machine to run the application. We could also use more scripts. I would like this solution to be more script oriented, rather than GUI oriented.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.Installing or configuring a WAS server instance as a Windows Service causes a lot of problems, especially when the server needs credentials to stop.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It should provide more flexibility to connect with external systems, and there should be in-built services that can be used to integrate with other systems quickly.The cloud and license of the subscription model for IBM BPM can be complex. There are a lot of alternatives to choose from.It has a low cost to implement. You'll get your money back in the same year that you complete the project.Our customers do see ROI. They'll identify some particularly painful or uncoordinated processes to start with, then build out from there, picking off low hanging fruit.We chose to purchase IBM BPM because it was bundled with the actual RPA program/solution that we decided to purchase. We decided to use Automation Anywhere tool (RPA), and it is was bundled with IBM BPM.It gives us a good return on investment.​We have definitely seen ROI. When we first kicked it off, we said it had to pay for itself within three years, and it did.

Read more »

I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs.There is an Eclipse Plugin provided by IBM, so no need to buy IBM Rational Application Developer or Rational Software Architect tools.If your application is just a web app that does not need to scale big, you can obtain a single core license of WAS Express edition, which has almost the same features with limited processing cores. If you manage a very big application farm (i.e. need to run 10 or more WAS servers) it is better to get IBM WAS Hypervisor Edition.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
391,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
13,365
Comparisons
8,974
Reviews
35
Average Words per Review
588
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
5,508
Comparisons
4,568
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
430
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process ServerWebSphere Application Server
Learn
IBM
IBM
Overview
IBM Business Process Manager is a comprehensive BPM platform giving you visibility and insight to manage business processes. It scales smoothly and easily from an initial project to a full enterprise-wide program harnesses complexity in a simple environment to better meet customer needs.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 IBM BPM
Learn more about IBM WebSphere Application Server
Sample Customers
Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito SantoTalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm62%
Insurance Company29%
Non Tech Company5%
Healthcare Company5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Comms Service Provider18%
Financial Services Firm15%
Insurance Company5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company42%
Comms Service Provider17%
Government12%
Retailer8%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Application Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
391,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.