We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"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."
"TIBCO has the platform in terms of speed and ease of use."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature is that it is a service-oriented architecture, SOA-based."
"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."
"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 technology is really easy to learn."
"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."
"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."
"Our version does not have cloud capabilities."
"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."
"The intermediate version that we are using has stability issues. These stability issues should be resolved, but it seems like TIBCO is not focusing on resolving these issues. The resolution timelines are quite high even for high-priority incidents. Its price should be lower. Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"The price is on the higher side. For the same price, if I go to the previous version, I would have got a lot more capacity with similar kinds of features."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."
Red Hat JBoss Fuse is a lightweight, flexible integration platform that enables rapid integration across the extended enterprise - on-premise or in the cloud. JBoss Fuse includes modular integration capabilities, an enterprise service bus (ESB), to unlock information.
Red Hat Fuse is ranked 7th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 3 reviews while TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is ranked 6th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 6 reviews. Red Hat Fuse is rated 7.6, while TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Default settings are enough to handle most requirements, but needs more flexibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus writes "Easy to use, performs well, and it's the best platform in terms of speed". Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and webMethods Integration Server, whereas TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server and IBM DataPower Gateway. 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.