Compare IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,548 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:

Pros
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern.""The solution has good integration.""Performance-wise, this solution is really good.""Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Pros »

"The most valuable features of this solution are scalability and performance.""The solution is much lighter as an application server than other solutions that we used before. We used IBM Workshare Application Server and Oracle WebLogic. They are heavy application servers. JBoss is lighter. It starts faster and iterates its application fast. It's much, much faster than the competition.""Stable and easy to handle in terms of hosting applications."

More JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Pros »

Cons
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved.""The installation configuration is quite difficult.""The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight.""Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Cons »

"This solution needs better management UI.""IBM offered JAVA profiling, which is something I used often and I wish that JBoss had something similar.""Lacks some functional requirements."

More JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives.""This product is more expensive than competing products.""I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
536,548 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage.
Top Answer: If you want to connect to the database, it provides solutions in India, but you have to purchase it separately. They are not mature enough and we have difficulties using them. They are expensive and… more »
Top Answer: The solution is much lighter as an application server than other solutions that we used before. We used IBM Workshare Application Server and Oracle WebLogic. They are heavy application servers. JBoss… more »
Top Answer: I might not be the best person to discuss what features are missing as I am only a developer. I rely on the connection point mechanics, thread pulling mechanics. That's as far as I go. In terms of… more »
Top Answer: JBoss has less maintenance costs than, for example, IBM.
Ranking
Views
3,374
Comparisons
2,824
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
541
Rating
7.8
Views
1,196
Comparisons
989
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
505
Rating
8.3
Comparisons
Also Known As
WebSphere Message Broker
JBoss EAP, Red Hat EAP
Learn More
Overview
WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.
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).
Offer
Learn more about IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Learn more about JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Sample Customers
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
APD, Banco Azteca, Roche, Tata Sky, Frost Bank
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm13%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm15%
Media Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,548 professionals have used our research since 2012.

IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Application Infrastructure with 4 reviews while JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is ranked 14th in Application Infrastructure with 3 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "Easy to setup and deploy, with easy mapping, and it integrates well with MQ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JBoss Enterprise Application Platform writes "Light, with an easy initial setup and a good set of features". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM BPM and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is most compared with IBM WebSphere Application Server, Apache Web Server, Microsoft .NET Framework, NGINX Plus and Oracle SOA Suite. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 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.