We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and IBM WebSphere Message Broker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Facilitates communication between parties and legacy systems."
"Seamlessly integrates your different applications."
"The product is usually very easy to deploy."
"We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"The interface is quite stable."
"like the API lead integration, which is more focused, and I also like real-time integration."
"I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things. The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good."
"The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The solution has good integration."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"This solution would benefit from improvements to the configuration interface."
"The solution needs to improve it's security and its proactive notification of security issues."
"I think security should be more simplified."
"I can't say that there is any improvement I’m looking for. I’m new and haven’t connected with all features. For all drawbacks that were in the old version, I think they have been solved. The scalability needs improvement."
"The next versions are moving toward container use. It would be a shame to make the product highly complex just to support one pattern of deployment. It is my hope that IBM continues to focus on practical functionality that is simple and cost-effective."
"We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support."
"In terms of improvement, the UI should be more user-friendly."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"It is currently a weighty product."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 63 reviews while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server, IBM DataPower Gateway and Red Hat Fuse, whereas IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and Red Hat Fuse. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.