We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and Windows Server AppFabric based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure."It helps maintain, and in many instances, lower costs, as well as to maintain those costs, keeping them stable."
"The functionality to design UI to be responsive and can run on multiple devices."
"The system integration layer is valuable because this enables an organization to create a single point where all the key organizational master data is held in different IT applications across different functions, that can be accessed and updated."
"Compliance with the BPMN 2.0 standard."
"We have automated processes with IBM BPM and DocuSign. Its valuable features include low-code, timer, etc. It makes it simple to implement the products. We generate reports using the solution."
"The case management and its integration with process design are good features."
"Its workflow and integration with SAP are the most valuable features. It is also a stable solution."
"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."
"The product's deployment phase was very easy."
"The most valuable feature is AppFabric's hosting solution, which is what we need for running workflows."
"It is very usable and easy to understand. Antivirus and VPN are the main features being used now. It allows my clients to access the network from home, which was very crucial because of the pandemic."
"It might not be suitable for entry level clients because it comes with a huge number of modules for processing that at times might not be necessary for upcoming clients."
"We would appreciate more user-friendly definitions of processes with a more user-friendly interface for documenting processes."
"There is a lot of room for improvement of the dashboards."
"IBM BPM needs to have a better and modified interface."
"IBM BPM can improve the dashboards and reports. It only has two dashboards, and reporting is very difficult to build."
"The solution can improve integration with SAP, CRM, and Salesforce, which is not capital-intensive."
"It's a bit technical, related to the instance of migrations. It's a tough thing to handle, in every new release, in every upgrade, that we have to do things in the applications or in the product. I think IBM is working on it but I know there are a lot of requests coming in from different organizations on this."
"There needs to be better documentation for IBM BPM in a central place. There is not any standard documentation for each component available and has been a barrier for developers."
"Its price and licensing policy can be improved. It could be a little cheaper. Licensing is sometimes confusing. There are so many different options. It is difficult to find out what to buy or what to choose for my necessity."
"The product is unable to connect with different cloud services."
"Microsoft will stop supporting the product next year, and we can't run unsupported programs in our systems."
IBM BPM is ranked 6th in Application Infrastructure with 105 reviews while Windows Server AppFabric is ranked 18th in Application Infrastructure with 3 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while Windows Server AppFabric is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "Offers good case management and its integration with process design but there's a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Server AppFabric writes "Offers good monitoring capabilities and ease of setup". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda, Appian, Pega BPM, IBM Business Automation Workflow and Apache Airflow, whereas Windows Server AppFabric is most compared with IIS.
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.