We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and IIS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"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."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"Windows Server IIS is stable."
"The initial setup of IIS is easy. The process takes only five minutes."
"The solution has been reliable."
"All the features of Microsoft IIS are valuable."
"The product is flexible."
"The interface, simplicity, and ease of management are all good features that make this user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of IIS is it does not consume a lot of resources. It does not consume a lot of resources, such as memory."
"This is definitely a stable solution."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"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 user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"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."
"I am using an older version of Windows Server IIS and the general management and navigation to get something done is not as straightforward as I hope it to be. The interface could be improved."
"It would be beneficial if you could automate security certificate monitoring with IIS."
"The security must be improved."
"Sometimes if you are using IIS in large-scale scenarios, meaning that if you are deploying an application within IIS service and you are expecting a large number of users to use this application, you can sometimes find some problems, meaning that the service can shut down by itself unexpectedly if you don't configure your IIS with the correct configuration that can handle this number of users."
"Scalability issues and security concerns need attention from Microsoft."
"The solution's scalability needs improvement."
"The documentation of IIS could be better. They are not easily accessible. I had to use YouTube and other online resources to learn how to use the solution properly."
"The price of the solution could be less to improve."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while IIS is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 53 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while IIS is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IIS writes " A simple and easy-to-use solution but not recommended for public apps". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas IIS is most compared with NGINX Plus, Apache Web Server, Oracle WebLogic Server and Tomcat. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS 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.
