IBM WebSphere Integration Developer vs JBoss Enterprise Application Platform comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Integration Developer and JBoss Enterprise Application Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Infrastructure Report (Updated: April 2024).
770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "The solution is cost-effective."
  • "It is an open-source solution."
  • More JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
    770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    85
    Comparisons
    77
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    2,825
    Comparisons
    2,483
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    270
    Rating
    9.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    WebSphere Integration Developer
    JBoss EAP, Red Hat EAP
    Learn More
    Overview
    WebSphere Integration Developer (WID) is an integrated development environment for building applications based on service-oriented architecture (SOA).
    Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (JBoss EAP) is an open source platform for modern Java applications deployed in any environment. JBoss EAP’s architecture is modular, and cloud ready. The platform offers powerful management and automation for greater developer productivity. It is based on the open source Wildfly project (formerly known as JBoss Application Server).
    Sample Customers
    The City of Edinburgh Council, Factor-y S.r.l., Alleyoop Inc., Dow Chemical Company, Airbus, Wittmann EDV-Systeme, The Chevrolet Volt, Federal Employment Agency, Web Business Consulting, Rosenthal & Rosenthal
    APD, Banco Azteca, Roche, Tata Sky, Frost Bank
    Top Industries
    No Data Available
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm30%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Government7%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business50%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise38%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Infrastructure
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: April 2024.
    770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM WebSphere Integration Developer is ranked 26th in Application Infrastructure while JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is ranked 9th in Application Infrastructure with 5 reviews. IBM WebSphere Integration Developer is rated 0.0, while JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is rated 9.0. On the other hand, the top reviewer of JBoss Enterprise Application Platform writes "A stable and scalable solution that provides excellent technical support with a good response time". IBM WebSphere Integration Developer is most compared with E2E Bridge, whereas JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is most compared with IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework, Apache Web Server, IBM BPM and NGINX Plus.

    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.