We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

IBM Integration Bus OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

IBM Integration Bus is the #2 ranked solution in our list of top Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) tools. It is most often compared to Mule ESB: IBM Integration Bus vs Mule ESB

What is IBM Integration Bus?
IBM Integration Bus is an enterprise integration engine that offers a fast, simple way for systems and applications to communicate with each other. As a result, it can help you achieve business value, reduce IT complexity and save money.

IBM Integration Bus is also known as IBM WebSphere ESB.

IBM Integration Bus Buyer's Guide

Download the IBM Integration Bus Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: October 2021

IBM Integration Bus Customers
Salesbox, €sterreichische Bundesbahnen (€BB), Road Buddy, Swiss Federal Railways, Electricity Supply Board, The Hartree Centre, ESB Networks
IBM Integration Bus Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about IBM Integration Bus pricing:
  • "The solution requires a license and is very expensive here in India."

IBM Integration Bus Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
PRINCEWILL OPARA
Head Banking Application Customization and Reporting at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Good integration capabilities with an easy-to-learn language but is very expensive

Pros and Cons

  • "The stability is mostly pretty good."
  • "Today, the IBM business rule engine, the DataPower is outside the Enterprise Service Bus. It's sold as a different feature or application. If it could be integrated, then it's able to handle a lot more of what we are doing now rather than just have a stateless ESB that you can't do much on, and a set of normal business rules."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for integrations of traffic between internal applications, communications, and transactions between various internal applications. We also use it for integration with various external parties.

How has it helped my organization?

Before we implemented IBM to integrate with other external parties, we had buckets of applications to build, and maintenance was difficult, as was support. On top of that, integration wasn't well controlled and managed. Right now, post-implementation of IBM ESB, we have a better structure. We have better teams in development and response to customers. We have an application that is centrally managed and monitored. We have better SOA experience in our development process.

What is most valuable?

The feature we find most useful is the ease of development.

It provides a variable within our application it can easily be used across various applications. 

ESQ is very robust and easy to learn. That's the language the solution is based on. 

The solution can scale.

The stability is mostly pretty good.

What needs improvement?

There are experiences we have on the application, such as latency issues. There are no inherent components for you to throttle and measure the velocity of transactions. For that, you have to get a separate application and set up more robust rules. Then, you can handle API throttling and a number of business logic and rules. You need to implement DataPower, in order to have this. It should have been integrated into a single application rather than having to deal with various applications and components. It would be nice if everything could be packaged under one solution.

Today, the IBM business rule engine, the DataPower is outside the Enterprise Service Bus. It's sold as a different feature or application. If it could be integrated, then it's able to handle a lot more of what we are doing now rather than just have a stateless ESB that you can't do much on, and a set of normal business rules.

If you have the business rule engine that can help us measure velocity, throttle, monetization, et cetera, within the ESB, it would be better than it is now. There won't be any need for one to start looking out for any possible change in the near future.

The initial setup is a bit complex. 

This is a very expensive product.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for more than five years at this point. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There is some latency and slowness in the application. At times, we have to restart the server, and there are some errors we can't handle. We send those to IBM. It's relatively stable, however, periodically, we have problems, which is why we have to get IBM to help us resolve them. That said, I would describe the product as stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of extensibility to other applications after development, it's highly extensible. The solution can scale. 

We have developers, who develop various integration requirements, and we have support. Outside that, we don't have physical users using it. There are about 10 developers in all, that handle various requirements that come along. The support unit is about five people and they are handling the support.

How are customer service and technical support?

We don't deal with IBM directly. There's a local partner of IBM that assists us. We only have a direct relationship with IBM, when the local partner cannot handle a problem. Our contract is designed with IBM in such a way that we have to go through their local partner. In terms of responsiveness, the local partner is good. I wouldn't say excellent, however, they are good in response time. In terms of timeline for issue resolution, TAT for issue resolution, they are fair.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Before we went to IBM, we didn't use a different solution, however, we checked in our industry and we checked how people felt about Microsoft middleware, and they didn't have a good experience. It's not robust, the support wasn't strong, et cetera. Therefore, we chose IBM. We were swayed by how other organizations, including banks in Nigeria, were mostly seeing success with IBM.

We are using WSO2 for some applications, however, we do not rely on it completely as it is open-source and if we run into issues we cannot rely on help from any support.

How was the initial setup?

Setting up the solution is not straightforward. It's difficult and complex. We needed assistance in order to manage the process properly. It's not something you can just pick up, and then, run on your own. You need help from a partner, which involves additional costs.

What about the implementation team?

We didn't do it alone. We worked with IBM, and then, IBM nominated a local partner in Nigeria that worked with us to set this up.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution is very expensive. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at another solution called WSO2. It is a lot easier to set up. It's easier to use, and it's less expensive. However, the challenge we have with that, is that the support is lacking as it is an open-source application. The support is not so strong. That's the only reservation we had for that. Outside that, we are also using it for some other applications as well.

The prominent other contenders were WebLogic from Oracle, and whatever was provided by Microsoft. Among the three then, IBM came out on top in our assessment and rating. However, with the benefit of the insights we now have, if we were to do the same process again, over five years, WSO2 has done so well, and some other middleware is also doing well. Likely we would not choose IBM if we had to choose again.

What other advice do I have?

We are customers and end-users.

I'd rate the solution around a seven out of ten.

I would advise companies to evaluate and consider the options and whether they make sense vis-a-vis the benefit they hope to derive is worth the while. IBM is not cheap. They need to consider costs and make sure they have internal resources available to them. Those using the solution need to be well trained. Otherwise, the company will end up depending on third parties for everything, and that will drive up the costs further. 

I'd also suggest companies implement such a solution early. Load balancing is very critical in our experience. We didn't implement load balancing immediately, and that affected us. As a company is implementing, it should consider load balancing. Rather than invest on the on-prem, a company should consider the cloud. We did on IBM Unix servers on-prem, and that's pretty expensive.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Qudrat Khan
Sr. Manager Software Quality Assurance at UBL
Real User
Top 20
A platform to seamlessly integrate applications. Regretfully it may have session management issues

Pros and Cons

  • "Promotes the reuse of developed resources to more efficiently consume resources."
  • "Seamlessly integrates your different applications."
  • "Session management can sometimes hand forcing server reboots."
  • "The product lacks an integrated testing module."

What is our primary use case?

We are using Integration Bus for SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture) services. We are using it to connect APIs to servers, we are using it as an integration bus for hosting, and we are hosting our web services over it. I am using and testing this from the QA (Quality Assurance) perspective.  

What is most valuable?

The Integration Bus has provided us with a certain level of security. For instance, before we used this solution, we were directly connecting to databases through a DB link. We were able to stop that practice and make it more secure using Integration Bus. It has also provided us with the capability to reuse developed services. Services we developed can now be used with multiple systems and we are able to remove duplicate applications due to this advantage.  

What needs improvement?

Surely something that can be improved is session management. Sometimes sessions hang. Practically every day we hear about session congestion and this kind of thing. Troubleshooting the issue has become a long-standing problem. Where the true problem lies is a challenge for our support team.  

The session management issue may be a bigger problem for us because our support team is not so highly trained. Also, sometimes our developers are not able to dig down to locate the actual problem. To resolve the issue when it occurs, we have to at least restart the server. It is not really solving the problem, it just relieves the symptoms. These session management problems are the basic issues we are having, but otherwise, our services have become better after bringing in the Integration Bus.  

One thing I would like to have added to Integration Bus is a plugin — or some other software, — to enable testing the performance of our services from the application hosted on the IBM service. I think that the users of the system should be able to get something like that and somehow do performance testing on their own. Currently, I have used some studio or some plugin to find these results. Another option is using services that are available that I have also tried. If IBM could provide this same type of testing capability in its application, that that would be great. It would enable us to report to our business on the facts about how much we have improved from the earlier architecture.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using IBM Integration Bus for the last three years.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a stable product especially with the release of version 10. We had problems with version 9. But now, version 10 was really a lot more stable and a lot of things have improved. We are much more satisfied with the product and stability of the performance. It is fairly rare that we are unable to troubleshoot something. But I think that most of the problems that we have, from my point of view, is because we are not better trained on the product as a whole. Maybe training could resolve some of our troubleshooting issues. Everything may not be the fault of the product.   

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We had scaled up the product usage, so I know it is scalable. We were only using it with a few systems in the beginning and now we are using it with a whole bank of systems and all of the systems are integrated tools.  

How are customer service and technical support?

The IBM partner that we are working with here is System Limited. IBM was not directly supporting us during the installation and if we have issues we work with the IBM partner.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did previously have another solution called BixTalk which we were using four to five years ago. One major problem with BizTalk was that we had very few people available who were actually trained on it. Secondly, there were some sever issues as well. We had a synchronization problem on top of that. Because it was so long ago I do not remember all the issues. Maybe we did have some other problems also. But we had a problem with the product support as well.  

How was the initial setup?

From an installation point of view and just initially setting up this product, it required a lot of configuration. The configuration is the harder part of the installation. Otherwise, the installation was done in a few days by our team. I do not remember exactly whether we had any major problems in doing that, but it could be there were problems and I just did not hear about them.  

There were a lot of things to configure, but that was taken care of by a different department. Our operations department would be the group that handled this. So I do not have actual first-hand information because I did not participate in the process.  

What other advice do I have?

It is a little hard to suggest a product for someone else without knowing anything about their situation. I would surely recommend it for companies that have lots of applications that they want to integrate. This is mostly what I would recommend it for. If you want a platform that seamlessly integrates your different applications, IBM Integration Bus for you.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate IBM Integration Bus as something like seven to eight. For the time being, I will give it a seven. I am pretty much satisfied with the product, but there are certainly ways I have mentioned in which it could improve.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about IBM Integration Bus. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2021.
542,823 professionals have used our research since 2012.
KL
Integration Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Simple to use in the data stage and good for moving a file from one location to another

Pros and Cons

  • "I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things. The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good."
  • "It needs improvement in terms of technical support as well as in terms of integration of data mining. I am not convinced about many things in this solution, such as the conversion of the DFDL or copybook file, which is the conversion from a text file to XML. It is very complex. They should also provide more information about this solution in the IBM Knowledge Center. I can get a lot of information from the IBM Knowledge Center about DataStage, but I don't get that much information about IBM Integration Bus. There is hardly any information even on the internet and various channels such as YouTube. They can provide good step-by-step documentation based on a company's requirements. It would be really helpful. My company is mainly looking for data mining and communicating with multiple servers. IBM Integration Bus is good for communicating with multiple servers, but it needs improvement for XML conversion and data mining. We have a lot of old systems that use XML."

What is our primary use case?

We are trying to use IBM Integration Bus in our organization. We have multiple things to do. Like DataStage, we also have SAP BODS as another ETL. We are also using JAM Server and Java. 

Instead of separately writing the Java code and restful web service and then using the ETL and JAM Server to call on a file basis, I am thinking of using IBM Integration Bus. I have a message flow. Once I drop a file, IBM Integration Bus will pick up all the functions, do everything on the MQ Server, and finally fit it with the web service, which is also created in IBM Integration Bus. I would have the complete message flow in one architecture site. I can apply it by using ETL, Java, and the JAM Server. However, it is failing at the data mining stage itself. It could be because of my lack of knowledge of IBM Integration Bus.

What is most valuable?

I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. 

Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things.

The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good.

What needs improvement?

It needs improvement in terms of technical support as well as in terms of integration of data mining. I am not convinced about many things in this solution, such as the conversion of the DFDL or copybook file, which is the conversion from a text file to XML. It is very complex.

They should also provide more information about this solution in the IBM Knowledge Center. I can get a lot of information from the IBM Knowledge Center about DataStage, but I don't get that much information about IBM Integration Bus. There is hardly any information even on the internet and various channels such as YouTube. They can provide good step-by-step documentation based on a company's requirements. It would be really helpful.

My company is mainly looking for data mining and communicating with multiple servers. IBM Integration Bus is good for communicating with multiple servers, but it needs improvement for XML conversion and data mining. We have a lot of old systems that use XML.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for two to four months.

How are customer service and technical support?

I contacted technical support, but I wasn't able to get the correct answer. I feel I wasn't given a good response. I was communicating with a person from technical support, and he took two to three months to help me with the support. Finally, he delegated that ticket to some other person, and he resolved my issue in one week, but the solution was not convincing. 

I wanted to know how DataStage does one-to-many and many-to-one mapping because it was failing in IBM Integration Bus. I have a DFPL file, and I have an XML Schema. I want to map the added element from the DFPL file to the XML Schema. The technical support person was saying that you have to write the ESQL code for mapping, but I don't know how many elements are there. Suppose I have 100 elements for one area at present, but next time, I might have 90 elements. He was saying that you should know somehow where IBM Integration Bus is failing, but there was no way to find that out. The mapping for that element was not there in the dynamic run-time query.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex. It is not user friendly. When you have a file in the MQ Server, it moves to the next directory, which is the output. It is very complex to call a web service. It should just give the setup of the endpoint and do some basic stuff so that it can be consumed by the web service. It might be complex because of my less experience in using IBM Integration Bus.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution if you are not doing any XML conversion or data mining and just want to use a message flow, such as reading a file and transporting to another location and then calling some message and integrating it with an existing system such as Salesforce.

If you have a lot of integration, I would recommend hiring some experienced people for it. IBM Integration Bus is a very big product, and people don't know even 20% of this product. If people have good knowledge of it, they can really do a lot of stuff. Based on my understanding, its complexity is the reason why people don't have good expertise in this product. I am an experienced Java professional, but I am facing a lot of difficulties in understanding IBM Integration Bus.

I would rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten. It needs improvement for data mining, DFDL, and schema converter. There should also be more documentation and information in the IBM Knowledge Center.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
CK
Enterprise Architect, Mars Global Services at Mars Inc.
Real User
Top 20
Good pricing and great features, but not easy to use

Pros and Cons

  • "The cost is pretty cheap, compared to what else is available in the market."
  • "The solution needs to improve it's security and its proactive notification of security issues."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution for supply chain management between ERP systems and warehouse management systems. We use it with multiple external partners.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has improved our organization in the sense that it offers new graphical user interfaces and protocols. The fact that they have been made available has helped out business.

What is most valuable?

The solution has a variety of valuable features.

The ESB characteristics are great. The transformation, protocol bridging and routing are great.

The list of features on offer are both useful and actionable.

The cost is pretty cheap, compared to what else is available in the market.

The solution has been on the market for ten to 15 years, so it's had a lot of time to develop.

What needs improvement?

The monolithic architecture is an issue.  Due to the fact that it's a built on monolithic architecture, the solution is not very lightweight. It's not highly productive, so, in that sense, it's not so user friendly.

The solution needs to be a little bit more business-friendly in its API management capability.

The solution needs to improve its security and its proactive notification of security issues.

The expiry of the passwords, certificates, and things like that need to be powered by alerts so that it's more obvious that it's something we need to update (before everything actually expires).

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for ten or more years. It's been over a decade since I originally started using the product. I've been working at this particular company as an enterprise architect for the last three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. It's reliable.

I don't recall experiencing any bugs or glitches recently. It doesn't crash.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable. When we need to expand the solution, we can do so easily.

We have about 5,000 integrations on the product. 

It is an integration platform, so everybody related to supply chain management uses it, and eCommerce as well.

How are customer service and technical support?

We've dealth with technical support in the past and have been more than satisfied with their level of service. They are knowledgable. They respond quickly. I'd rate it nine out of ten overall.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Although we didn't use another solution per se, we do use MuleSoft. 

MuleSoft is more lightweight. It's not as monolithic. We use MuleSoft and another IBM solution. However, we've been using IBM Integration Bus for such a long time at this point. It's been ten to 15 years or so. We've only used MuleSoft for the last three years. It has high productivity and a good number of integrations and the API exchange capabilities.

We run the solutions in parallel.

MuleSoft is a pretty good solution, however, we've noticed that the pricing over the last few years has gone up and it's become quite costly.

How was the initial setup?

The solution has been on the market for over a decade, so the initial setup is pretty straightforward. They've had time to perfect the process. There's also a lot of people who understand how to install it, as it's a mature product with lots of history. Many people have worked with it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is pretty good. We've noticed that it's quite reasonable, whereas, for example, solutions like MuleSoft are rising. Salesforce recently acquired MuleSoft and has grown its market share, however, the pricing is turning people off. IBM is much more reasonable.

What other advice do I have?

We're IBM customers. We don't have a business relationship with IBM.

The solution is deployed on an underlying platform in the traditional MQ.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, however, it's not user friendly. That said, it works really well.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
YD
CTO at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Great user interface, good technical support, and very stable

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is stable and can scale relatively easily."
  • "IBM doesn't really have a very strong community surrounding the product. Most of its direct competitors are open source solutions, and those have an excellent and well-developed community around the tech to help users navigate the ins and outs of the product. IBM is lacking in this area."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case for the solution is infrastructure optimization. Most times the client wants to optimize their integration infrastructure and they want to simplify it. When they feel home-grown solutions are not scaling well for them in terms of complexity, in terms of speed to market, they look to this solution. Projects take long and they break down all the time. That's when the clients start thinking Integration Bus. It's a solution that offloads all the integrations of their system.

What is most valuable?

The solution offers pretty good pricing.

The technical support is great.

The solution is stable and can scale relatively easily.

The user interface is easy to navigate.

The performance is decent.

The solution offers good dashboards.

The management and monitoring on offer are very good.

What needs improvement?

IBM doesn't really have a very strong community surrounding the product. Most of its direct competitors are open source solutions, and those have an excellent and well-developed community around the tech to help users navigate the ins and outs of the product. IBM is lacking in this area. If they had more of a community, more people would know about the product. They should push to create a developer community around it and make the products more accessible to developers.

I've heard some clients are asking for autoscaling capabilities. It could improve DevOps. They might have something similar in other products, however, if they could introduce it within this product at some small level, it would make many clients happy.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution in the company for less than a year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We've been pleased with the solution's reliability. It's stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. I don't recall facing any bugs or glitches. It just works well all the time.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution scales quite well. If a company needs to expand it out, they can do so easily.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support has been good. They're responsive and knowledgeable. We've been satisfied with their support. It's been great.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation is straightforward. It's not complex. What takes a long time, however, is implementing the workflows or projects. That's where the efforts is. In terms of implementation, the implementation is straightforward. However, building the integration of workflows can be a bit tricky. 

You have to pick the right project as the first project, due to the fact that you're introducing a new product inside an organization. The first project is important in terms of setting the stage for understanding the underlying functionality. It shouldn't be too complex. At the same time, it should be impactful enough that you get management support going forward. It should be a project that is big enough whereby you can see the impact of the Integration Bus. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is pretty good. What they charge isn't unreasonable.

What other advice do I have?

We're IBM partner-resellers.

The reason we've implemented the solution is driven more by our clients' demands. The clients want IBM Integration Bus, or they already have some investment in IBM Integration Bus. We want to build capability in it to support the clients. We don't have a level of experience with the solution.

My personal advice to others is to start small so that you give yourself a good preliminary base that's not too overwhelming. Most clients want to do everything with this solution, which is fine. However, it's always better to start small with a departmental project, as opposed to an enterprise-wide kind of thing. It is better to start small and tackle a practical project and get used to everything before going really big.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
AJ
Assistant Vice President at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Quality components, good service, and exceptionally stable

Pros and Cons

  • "Having the solution come from IBM you know you are receiving a product of quality in components and in the services, it is very good."
  • "We used a third-party vendor, who help us install the solution and it was not easy."

What is our primary use case?

We are using the solution as an outer layer for all of our API calls we are making outside of our own devices. All APIs integrations are routing through the ESB only. We are using it for IIB server components and the DataPower, which is an API gateway. It is providing us with a security layer because all the outside calls do not have direct communication with our own server, this middle layer is called the ESB. 

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has helped my organization because any new integration coming to my backend system, we can easily implement it in a shorter time. This is because the middle layer takes care of all API language conversions or the code conversion, and also does the maintaining of the logs.

What is most valuable?

Having the solution come from IBM you know you are receiving a product of quality in components and in the services, it is very good.

What needs improvement?

I do not think there are any improvement areas because it depends on what exactly the use case for this ESB is. Some organizations are having a lot of integration and they will choose a regular ESB. While others will choose the security purpose route, making an extra layer. It depends from organization to organization, to determine how this solution can be improved from their specific use cases. Otherwise, I think that there are not any relevant improvement areas to give.

For how long have I used the solution?

I used the solution in my last company for a long while.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution came to the market a long while ago, it has had time to mature. It is really stable and large organizations can rely on it. Smaller companies could too but it is too expensive.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is a scalable solution. You can have any number of integration, it depends on the server and how much space you are providing to the IIB servers. We plan to have more than 50 wired integration by the end of the year.

How was the initial setup?

The installation is not easy. You need experts who know how to install this IIB. The common technician will not have the knowledge to do it. You will need assistance installing the solution even though on IBM's website you can download the complete user manual explaining how to install the IIB servers. 

What about the implementation team?

We used a third-party vendor, who help us install the solution and it was not easy. If you have most things in place at the site the whole installation process can take approximately three days. 

To do the complete deployment you will need at least one architecture that understands this IIB solution. It all depends on what kind of IP division architecture you have. Based on the project's scope, you then can define your team. There is no certain number of how many team members is required. It depends on your project, how large it is, and based on that you can decide how much manpower is required.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution requires a license and is very expensive here in India. Large organizations will be able to afford it but smaller companies will have a difficult time paying for the solution at the current price.

What other advice do I have?

I am going to continue to use this solution, when you purchase this solution you have spent a lot of money, you have to continue to use it to make a return on investment.

I would recommend this solution if they have a large budget.

I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
DI
Software Services & Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
MSP
Top 20
Extremely stable solution for communication between systems

Pros and Cons

  • "I consider the solution to be one of the most stable in the market."
  • "We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support."
  • "I don't mind the pricing."

What is our primary use case?

We are, of course, using the latest version. 

We use the solution for bridging the gap between different legacy systems. Re-usability is another function of the solution. So too, we use it to limit the challenges faced between different systems that are unable to communicate at the same speed and rate, or that need to talk among different systems, to utilize a channel which is bigger and better, to make use of the back-end or in respect of some other point-to-point integration need. As such, our uses for the solution vary depending on the customer. An example would be that which relates to a banking industry, for which there would be a core banking system, the need for card systems, ATM transactions, et cetera. Middleware plays a key role in the usability of these services. The goal is to avoid point-to-point integration between the channels and the back-end systems making use of the solution.

What needs improvement?

We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support. 

For how long have I used the solution?

Our organization has been using IBM Integration Bus in various branches, spanning a host of  locations, since before I joined 14 years ago. It has been doing so for the past 15 to 20 years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?


I consider the solution to be one of the most stable in the market, in comparison with others such as Oracle and this assessment I maintain on an ongoing basis. I have received much feedback from customers about the solution's stability. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable, but we have yet to receive the full review and feedback. This is because we have been informed that the latest systems have only recently been produced. So, I cannot give you complete feedback about the scalability of the solution at the moment. The latest deployment is on a container platform.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have received many complaints from customers that the customer and technical support should be faster. 

How was the initial setup?

I believe the initial setup was easy, but this is a question best taken up with the technical team. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I use the traditional licensing model, which I believe to not be on a monthly basis, as the solution is not cloud-based. 

I don't mind the pricing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?



What other advice do I have?

90 percent of days the solution is on the client enrollment. We are hoping to encounter good business cases, involving integration planning, as the trend is for people to gradually transition to the cloud, the government initiative being that involving Azure. 

As we are a service provider, I cannot give you exact figures about the number of users in our organization who are making use of the solution. As mentioned, this depends on the customer, with each one involving its own user type. 

I would, of course, recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM Integration Bus as an eight out of ten. 

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
JB
Managing Director at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 20
Suitable for any size company; content is easily infiltrated in the eclipse infrastructure

Pros and Cons

  • "Content is easily infiltrated in the eclipse infrastructure."
  • "The solution is too expensive for smaller companies."

What is our primary use case?

I'm responsible for Strategy and Architecture for an IT consulting company they are partners with IBM. 

What is most valuable?

I like that this solution is suitable for any size company. It's simple to use from a development perspective because the content is easily infiltrated in the eclipse infrastructure. It's also credible in all the application aspects and easy to integrate into the enterprise application landscape. Finally, there is also a good relationship with IBM itself that assists us in implementing. You can really use this architecture but you have to understand the technology itself. It means you can do everything with this technology on condition that implementation is carried out correctly but this is a general term and valid for all solutions on the market. IBM is offering with the Integration Bus a very robust and stable solution.

What needs improvement?

The solution itself is quite expensive for smaller companies because of a complex architecture setup if you just start. Easier and a more plug and playable solution which make an MVP easier in being able to show the value faster to the customer.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for about 10 years in different projects and for different customers.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a very stable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability depends on the money that you have in your pockets. Technologically speaking, it's a scalable solution. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I get good support from the IBM technical people. It also depends on your philosophy, how you implement this. I have a lot of very experienced people, but also a good relationship with the laboratories, which is also sometimes necessary when you're doing something new and a highly sophisticated implementation is required. You need to have a support team for the product development. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward, it's a simple solution. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Evaluate and define a clear architecture, and set up a governance framework that includes a competence center that will take care of the usage, the licenses which will be needed, and do guarantee the reuse of interfaces and components.

What other advice do I have?

I always suggest carrying out a proof of concept each time. People who are able to set this up and also monitor it, will discover how easy it is to customize and to integrate the architecture. The POC creates familiarity and also an understanding of the skill set required. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Buyer's Guide
Download our free IBM Integration Bus Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.