We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and Windows Process Activation Services based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure."IBM WAS is the backbone for our enterprise content management suite which delivers the primary processes for our customers. Without a good application server, it would be hard to provide a secure layer of midddleware upon which the other applications run. IBM WAS improves the stability of the entire solution and provides a high quality platform for running web-based solutions."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Portal Virtualization."
"IBM WAS is extremely scalable. It is easy to add additional servers and to divide the load over servers in all kinds of ways."
"The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable."
"We needed this type of integration and WebShepere is the best tool for it."
"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."
"The VPN service is quite useful."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the central console, that allows you to see all of the activated and deactivated computers."
"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
"The licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"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."
"When we run into memory or locking issues, we resort to using third-party tools. However, it would be preferable to have native tools for debugging this type of problem."
"Installing or configuring a WAS server instance as a Windows Service causes a lot of problems, especially when the server needs credentials to stop."
"The stability of the solution needs improvement."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews while Windows Process Activation Services is ranked 23rd in Application Infrastructure. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Windows Process Activation Services is rated 4.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Process Activation Services writes "Central console enables us to see all of the activated and deactivated computers but it has poor alerts and frustrating technical support". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and IBM BPM, whereas Windows Process Activation Services is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework and 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.