We performed a comparison between JBoss ESB and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, MuleSoft, Software AG and others in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus)."The solution is very easy to use. I can download the trial version and just give it a go."
"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."
"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."
"What I like best about webMethods Integration Server is its portfolio of connectors."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"High throughput and excellent scalability."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"The EPA, from what I understand, lacks a lot of features and it doesn't really know how to interface with legacy systems or how to develop APIs for legacy systems."
"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"Support is expensive."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
JBoss ESB is ranked 14th in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 60 reviews. JBoss ESB is rated 7.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of JBoss ESB writes "Easy to use with flexible pricing, but needs more flexibility surrounding integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". JBoss ESB is most compared with Mule ESB, Red Hat Fuse, Oracle Service Bus and IBM Integration Bus, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with webMethods.io Integration, IBM Integration Bus, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Oracle Service Bus.
See our list of best ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) vendors.
We monitor all ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) 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.