We performed a comparison between Red Hat Fuse and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default setting."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful."
"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"The stability has been good."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."
"It's very stable and reliable."
"The GUI and IDE features of this solution are easy to work with and to develop. We find application management easy using this solution. It is a stable product"
"It is easy to develop. It has a very wide range of features. The older versions are very stable, and there are no issues with the product."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring, ease of use, and easy to understand development GUI."
"The product’s most valuable feature is stability."
"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."
"It might help if, in the documentation, there were a comments section or some kind of community input. I might read a page of documentation and not fully understand everything, or it might not quite answer the question I had. If there were a section associated with it where people could discuss the same topic, that might be helpful because somebody else might have already asked the question that I had."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"For improvement, they can consider the way we collaborate with other applications...Right now, in Red Hat Fuse, everything is not available under one umbrella."
"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."
"I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors."
"The solution is very expensive when you use multiple components, it would b better if this could be reduced."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
"Our version does not have cloud capabilities."
"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."
"In the configuration, where we need to customize, it takes more time that we expect it to, ideally."
"If TIBCO could be able to sort the size of their base image in the Container edition, it would be really marvelous. Right now it's around 299 MB. We'd really want it to reduce to a few MBs."
More TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Fuse is ranked 4th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 23 reviews while TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is ranked 9th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 12 reviews. Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.2, while TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus writes "A robust product that needs to improve the functionality it offers related to API lifecycle management". Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, IBM DataPower Gateway and Workday Business Process Framework. See our Red Hat Fuse vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.
