We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Oracle SOA Suite 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."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."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"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."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Conceptually, how it integrates a lot of essential enterprise process components. That's the most valuable."
"The integration with various products."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the option to design, and the development can happen at the same time."
"In Oracle SOA Suite some applications are not able to use REST, but it can support both SOAP and REST. You're able to integrate quite a lot of systems, which may not be able to in other solutions. You can also use XML and JSON. It is a standardizing type of tool. It doesn't matter whether I'm using JSON or XML, it can convert them."
"The product allows you to visualize how a company is working currently by providing rich possibilities for analysis such as the audit trails and therefore shows where improvements might be valuable."
"The ability to stand up a highly available SOA Suite, which has full DR capabilities, in a remote center and synchronize the databases using Data Guard."
"I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"Valuable features include connectors and BAM."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The technical support is good, we have premier support which costs extra."
"The installation and adjustment process seems too complex."
"One area that could be better is the human task feature. It could be improved to provide more functionality and customization options because it has limited options available."
"Various parts of SOA, BPEL, and so on, each have their own consoles which need to be accessed individually with different logins. It would be better from an admin perspective if all the consoles were accessible via a single login."
"The web services need to be more robust."
"SOA"
"The solution’s initial setup is complex and could be improved."
"If the disk space expansion can be made more flexible, not requiring a database restart, it would be a major benefit."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 10th in Application Infrastructure with 11 reviews while Oracle SOA Suite is ranked 8th in Application Infrastructure with 65 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while Oracle SOA Suite is rated 8.0. 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 Oracle SOA Suite writes "Easy to setup, provides good support and scalable solution ". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and IBM BPM, whereas Oracle SOA Suite is most compared with Mule ESB, WebLogic Suite, Apache Web Server, TIBCO ActiveMatrix and IBM BPM. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Oracle SOA Suite 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.
