We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and NGINX Plus 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."The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"Zero Downtime has always been a strength in recommending infrastructure web services. NGINX allows me to execute such infrastructure with less complications and the ability to switch from server to server easily."
"I think installation only took a couple of minutes — no more than 10 minutes."
"Valuable features include authentication, caching, reverse proxy routing, and load balancing."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is simple to configure."
"This solution has everything."
"The load balancing module, which is equivalent to LTM, is the focus of the PSE. So far, the features of both are identical. I believe NGINX has more features for securing these services, but in terms of load balancing, both are massive solutions."
"When you use NGINX, you have more options and power."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The solution must improve its performance."
"The scalability could be improved."
"The solution's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"I would like to see the Grafana integration in NGINX which is already present in HAProxy. Grafana integration will help the solution visualize all the data analytics on the dashboard which is currently not present."
"NGINX Plus is moderately priced, but it could give better value for money."
"Only improvement needed that I would point to is scalability. With it, I mean clusterized organisation on a low level. At the moment, the best alternative is RHEL HA."
"The scaling should be built into the software rather than configured from an outside source."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while NGINX Plus is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 28 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Apache Web Server. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. NGINX Plus 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.
