TrustRadius

IBM CICS Transaction Server vs. Microsoft Application Server (deprecated)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM CICS Transaction Server
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
IBM CICS (Customer Information Control System) is mixed-language application server that runs on IBM z/OS. CICS® Transaction Server, often called CICS, is used for hosting transactional enterprise applications in a hybrid architecture.N/A
Microsoft Application Server (deprecated)
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Application Server is an expanded server role in the Windows Server® 2008 operating system. It provided an integrated environment for deploying and running custom, server-based business applications. These applications respond to requests that arrive over the network from remote client computers or from other applications. Application Server is deprecated.N/A
Pricing
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons
Features
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Application Servers
Comparison of Application Servers features of Product A and Product B
IBM CICS Transaction Server
8.4
1 Ratings
5% above category average
Microsoft Application Server (deprecated)
8.0
9 Ratings
0% above category average
Security management10.01 Ratings9.09 Ratings
Administration and management10.01 Ratings7.09 Ratings
Application server performance7.01 Ratings9.09 Ratings
Installation10.01 Ratings7.19 Ratings
Open-source standards compliance5.01 Ratings7.08 Ratings
IDE support00 Ratings9.09 Ratings
Best Alternatives
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Small Businesses
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.0
(9 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM CICS Transaction ServerMicrosoft Application Server (deprecated)
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
The strengths of CICS are certainly the scalability. The multilevel architecture of the CICS regions, security, and performance, manages to manage large volumes of transactions with efficient performances.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Microsoft
Microsoft Application Server has been incredible this past year during COVID. Previously I would have said that we could go without it, but after this past season, I’m glad we have utilized it. Without having this software set up prior to COVID, we would have been in a tough situation. I mention COVID a lot because we were able to continue our work almost seamlessly this entire year.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Pros
IBM
  • De facto standard in the legacy enterprise
  • Multiplatform connection
  • Native connection with DB2
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Microsoft Application Server has proven to be highly reliable and effective at deploying to all of its clients.
  • Application performance is surprisingly good and responsive even in bandwidth-constrained environments and generally very reliable.
  • All software programs are manageable from a single location, even when bandwidth is limited.
Aurpa Fiza | TrustRadius Reviewer
Aurpa Fiza
Mapple Ltd
Read full review
Cons
IBM
  • Direct internet connection
  • Social connectors
  • Speak Java not only with Websphere
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Some security hotfixes and general release updates require restarts.
  • We wish it supported more applications out of the box.
  • Thin client support would be great for MS Application Server.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Usability
IBM
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
I have found Microsoft Application Server to be incredibly easy to use. I have used dozens of similar programs and have always struggled to navigate through all the functions. So far I have been able to adapt and learn this software with ease. I rarely run into a problem that I wasn’t easily able to move forward on with a few tips.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Support Rating
IBM
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
Stability is one of the first things we consider when evaluating software. MS Application Server has been rock solid and has reduced the time that our IT staff dedicates to maintaining our legacy applications.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
IBM
There is no comparison, in practice, the possibility of using the latest programming languages but, above all, the databases can be different and more modern than DL1.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Microsoft
It has a similar feature to what Microsoft Application Server has but at a greater cost and also having to deal with another vendor when we could use a full Microsoft Stack for better training and support.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Return on Investment
IBM
  • More scalability than servers
  • More reliability than servers
  • More security
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Our ROI has been great since it has enabled our IT staff to have a central location to perform application updates which enables us to save time and money.
  • Deployment is very easy since the internal applications that required constant updating are now updated in one central location.
  • It's a lot easier to be within compliance protocols requirements.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
ScreenShots