Compare IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework

You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,557 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:

This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful.The scalability of the product is quite good.We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it.It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions.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.

More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pros »

The most valuable features for us are web frameworks like MVC, Web API, and WCS.Proven solution with valuable customization.Ease of use, the richness of the libraries and basically very good development tools.I'd rate the solution as highly stable.As we are a software company, we find that accessing resources using this technology is easier compared to the others.The .NET framework is a mature platform that is very helpful and saves time during the software development process.When it comes to the user interface, the context is better than other tools because it is easier to use.The most valuable feature is the financial accounting.

More Microsoft .NET Framework Pros »

Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those.The availability of the solution needs improvement.I think that this is a good product but I think that the cloud environment could be improved. I think that the future is in the utilization of the product in a product as a service way which is something that is lacking at this moment.It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving.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.

More IBM WebSphere Application Server Cons »

I would like to see more pre-built features in the MVC framework because as it is now, it's very open and you have to develop your own controls in order to use it.Lacking in auto-scaling.The .NET open source community could be larger.The pricing is a bit expensive.In the next release, I am looking for more advanced technologies such as socket communication and enhanced features like realtime chat with the clients.If Microsoft would provide a monthly subscription at a cost that a developer can afford then it would be really helpful.They should have more training materials available that are specific to .NET. We spend a lot of money training our engineers.This solution should include Power BI so that we don't have to use any third-party tools.

More Microsoft .NET Framework Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The price of this product is higher than that of competitors.We pay around $200,000 annually.I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs.

More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice »

The Microsoft .NET Framework is free of charge, without licensing cost.If you want to develop an enterprise-level application, you have to purchase the enterprise-level development license.There is a Community Edition that can be used free of charge, but the licensing cost for the Enterprise version is quite high.The pricing could be cheaper.The product and support for this solution are free for everyone.Do your homework. Consider the partnership program.

More Microsoft .NET Framework Pricing and Cost Advice »

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
437,557 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it.
Top Answer: The product is very expensive because PVU has to be calculated on maximun virtual cores and there is no difference between production and non-production environments.
Top Answer: Cloud service offering should be improved because the future is in the utilization of the PaaS provided by principal cloud providers; I mean that it would be very useful to have the possibility to use… more »
Top Answer: Proven solution with valuable customization.
Top Answer: Nothing in particular comes to mind in terms of improvement. It's a proven solution and it really depends on the resources that a company has for maintenance once a solution is in place. That said, it… more »
Average Words per Review
Avg. Rating
Average Words per Review
Avg. Rating
Popular Comparisons
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere Application Server
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..NET Framework is a software framework that runs primarily on Microsoft Windows. It includes a large class library named Framework Class Library (FCL) and provides language interoperability across several programming languages. Programs written for .NET Framework execute in a software environment named Common Language Runtime (CLR), an application virtual machine that provides services such as security, memory management, and exception handling. FCL and CLR together constitute .NET Framework.
Learn more about IBM WebSphere Application Server
Learn more about Microsoft .NET Framework
Sample Customers
TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal LeagueCurtin University, Rockwell Automation, Aruba Networks, Insurity Inc., City of Barcelona, Pennsylvania DCNR, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, A1 Telekom Austria AG, Eastman Chemical Company
Top Industries
Manufacturing Company29%
Financial Services Firm14%
Healthcare Company14%
Computer Software Company44%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company8%
Computer Software Company25%
Comms Service Provider19%
Manufacturing Company7%
K 12 Educational Company Or School7%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,557 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 7 reviews while Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Valuable connection management and scalability but is quite expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Has improved our efficiency in the time it takes to program a solution". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss, Tomcat, IBM BPM, Oracle WebLogic Server and Apache Web Server, whereas Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Apache Web Server, NGINX Plus and IBM BPM. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework 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.