We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and Microsoft .NET Framework based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"One of the most valuable features might be the stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"The thing about WebSphere, as opposed to other ones that I am aware of such as JBoss and Liberty, is that WebSphere has the most comprehensive scaffolding available to it."
"Ease of administration: It has an Integrated Solutions Console, what we call the administrative console, with very detailed configurations and Help pages for each configurable item."
"The only reason why we're currently using WebSphere is that the integration of the authentication with Azure is very quick. WebSphere has something that can immediately connect with Azure Active Directory."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"When we talk about .NET development, we use Visual Studio IDE to create these things. In recent years, there have been a lot of improvements in Visual Studio 2022. It would be a daunting task to list all of the features that have benefited us, as it would require a lot of time and effort. However, there are definitely many improvements year after year in .NET development."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft .NET Framework is debugging."
"The most valuable feature is the financial accounting."
"The .NET Framework is easier to use because it provides a wide range of libraries."
"Ease of use, the richness of the libraries and basically very good development tools."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution is not limited in storage, is customizable and simple to use."
"The new .NET Core has those middlewares, which are awesome from a security standpoint. With the old Framework or the newer Framework, middleware is basically an event pipeline. You configure and register it, and it handles things centrally. A simple example is logging. With the old Framework, you needed to try/catch blocks everywhere. Here, you configure the logging handler once, and it captures exceptions across the application. I really like the middleware pattern."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"IBM needs to pay attention to market changes more quickly. We now have Java 9 and very soon Java EE8. We do not want to wait for two or three years after their release until they are supported by the new version."
"In spite of the solution's robustness, it is expensive and a bit difficult to support."
"The footprint could be reduced so that we can use a smaller virtual machine to run the application. We could also use more scripts. I would like this solution to be more script oriented, rather than GUI oriented."
"It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
".NET Is still heavy or dependant on other Microsoft libraries and frameworks."
"The product is nearing its sunset, and we think that by 2028, we won't get support anymore"
"There are performance constraints when multiple users are accessing the application and that consumes CPU resources."
"In my opinion, this solution can be improved by providing out-of-the-box support for different types of libraries."
"The product’s reliability needs improvement."
"I would like to see a better response time from the technical support."
"The solution has difficulty integrating with other products. There are no such difficulties if you have the same platform, hardware, and operating system."
"Better integration with other tools to make the operation faster would be an improvement."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews while Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and Fujitsu Interstage Application Server, whereas Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Apache Web Server and Oracle SOA Suite. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.