We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Microsoft System Center 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."The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"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."
"The solution has good integration."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft System Center is its GUI (graphical user interface)."
"Managment Packs for Microsoft-specific products, help us implement the best practices for each product."
"System Center helps to create the basis for ITIL alignment."
"The deployment and asset management features are the most valuable. These are the product's main features."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The solution is easily available. That's its most valuable aspect."
"Many processes could be implemented out-of-the-box, and this helped to adopt processes in areas which we lacked."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ease of configuration and the easy discovery of the environment."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"Could be more user friendly."
"They should have some customized solutions or internal development, then maybe it could be easier to use different solutions or some self-developed solution."
"The solution's dashboard needs improvement."
"In Microsoft System Center, it is difficult to follow the steps to create dataflows at times."
"Implementation and integration in the case of multi-tenant environments needs improvement."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Something super important that we need is this integration via Intune Configuration Manager."
"The multi-tenancy support needs to be improved. We need to have the ability to manage several different environments from one central point of administration."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while Microsoft System Center is ranked 14th in Application Infrastructure with 17 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while Microsoft System Center is rated 7.8. 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 Microsoft System Center writes "Good review of configurations, effective antivirus administration, and has weekly reports". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and IBM BPM, whereas Microsoft System Center is most compared with Oracle SOA Suite. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft System Center 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.