I would rate this solution 7 out of 10. 

My advice is to make use of the tool 100%. I have seen many people who aren't using it properly. There's a lot more to configure and monitor. I see they use 60% of what it gives. I advise people to just see the options and use everything and that will create a wonderful product for them.

Taking into account the technical aspect of IBM WebSphere Message Broker as a stand-alone solution, it has proven to be extremely stable and of high quality. However, in comparison to its industry competitors, such as MuleSoft or other ESB solutions, the issue with IBM is that they frequently release new versions of the solution, resulting in the need for updates that must be done frequently, thus causing an increase in license costs due to the support of older versions, ultimately leading to required upgrades. Consequently, IBM is falling behind its competitors in this area.

We would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I would definitely recommend the solution to those planning to use it.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

My advice to anybody who is looking at WebSphere Message Broker is to fully consider their use case. In general, I suggest looking for another product because there are better options available in terms of both cost and usability.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

It's a good solution but it's questionable now that microservers have come into it. I can't really comment on whether I would recommend this solution for those who are looking to implement this solution, because everyone has their own use case.

I would rate IBM WebSphere Message Broker an eight out of ten. I had a good experience with this solution, and have not had any issues that we could not fix or handle.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

I recommend the solution.

At this point, I only use twenty to thirty percent of the facilities or services that are offered by this tool. For the main purpose of the suite, I have no specific concerns about it.

This is a good product, but there are still some challenges.

If I were rating Oracle then I would give it a six out of ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

If you have access to resources, it's not hard to learn to use this product. However, today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM. I would rate this solution as five out of ten.

This is a good solution and when I have a customer that needs something with this capability, it is the first option that I suggest to them.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I think it's a reasonably good solution but I also believe it has some good competitors like MuleSoft which has good incubation points and has a cloud solution. ESB is still in the data centers, not the extenders, and they're mostly on a non-cloud based platform. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.