IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition vs. Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
WebSphere Hybrid Edition from IBM is a collection of WebSphere application runtimes and modernization tools that provides support for on-premise and major public cloud deployments, in virtual machines, containers and Kubernetes. The user can choose any WebSphere edition and deploy Liberty and application modernization tools to help move to a cloud-native architecture, modernize existing applications and support an existing WebSphere estate.
$88.50
per month
Red Hat JBoss EAP
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
Pricing
IBM WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Editions & Modules
Application Server
$88.50
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss EAP
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 WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Considered Both Products
IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition
Chose IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition
WebSphere Application Server admin console is very detailed and there are a huge number of configurations available to maintain and configure. JBoss is complex where stand vs full configuration is confusing sometimes. Modularity proved complex there, so I love WebSphere …
Chose IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition
I recommended WebSphere because of my expertise on it and the great IBM support.
Red Hat JBoss EAP
Chose Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
We decided to use Red Hat JBoss EAP as it lowers our overall cost, supports all the features that we are looking for including clustering, distributed caching and web services.
JBoss EAP is modular and has cloud-ready architecture.
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Features
IBM WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Application Servers
Comparison of Application Servers features of Product A and Product B
IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition
8.1
29 Ratings
1% above category average
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
8.6
8 Ratings
7% above category average
IDE support8.224 Ratings8.18 Ratings
Security management8.729 Ratings8.68 Ratings
Administration and management8.129 Ratings8.18 Ratings
Application server performance8.429 Ratings8.68 Ratings
Installation7.928 Ratings9.58 Ratings
Open-source standards compliance7.124 Ratings8.68 Ratings
Best Alternatives
IBM WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
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 WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
8.6
(31 ratings)
8.1
(8 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.5
(4 ratings)
5.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(4 ratings)
8.5
(3 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.7
(3 ratings)
Support Rating
8.7
(4 ratings)
5.2
(2 ratings)
Ease of integration
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.5
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM WebSphere Hybrid EditionRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
IBM WebSphere Hybrid edition is well-suited for the development and deployment of large enterprise-level applications such as Electronic Health Records that are used in our organization. IBM WebSphere is appropriate for organizations that require strong security and compliance as it provides a high level of security and compliance features. This works well with organizations that are subject to strict regulatory requirements, such as hospitals.
Read full review
Red Hat
JBoss EAP is subscription based/open source platform. It's very reliable and great for deploying high transaction Java based enterprise applications. It integrates well with third party components like mod_cluster and supports popular Java EE web-based frameworks such as Spring, Angular JS, jQuery Mobile, and Google Web Toolkit.
Read full review
Pros
IBM
  • IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition has done marvelous in building and deploying Java Enterprise applications.
  • It also does well in automating deployment and scaling. This has made it easier for our organization to deploy updates to our applications.
  • IBM WebSphere Hybrid Edition does well in security by providing features that protect enterprise applications.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • MOD_CLUSTER integration. JBoss EAP integrates pretty well with mod_cluster. This is an intelligent load balancer especially useful in highly clustered environments.
  • Supports enterprise-grade features such as high availability clustering, distributed caching, messaging etc.
  • Supports deployment in on-premise, virtual and hybrid cloud environments.
Read full review
Cons
IBM
  • Ease of use in terms of deployment, give simple interface to do simple stuff like Tomcat, JBoss or GlassFish.
  • Takes long time to start the server.
  • The Liferay wars need to be decorated and then deployed. Perhaps we could simplify that.
  • Some of the concepts are good for complexity that WAS can handle but could be simplified and better documented, like concepts of well and profile, context, etc.
  • A Liferay war file created using Liferay Developer studio runs fine in Tomcat, however that may not run in WAS 7.x because it needs to be decorated. I had one war for a Liferay portlet with a simple cron job, and had hard time running to WAS server. It was running on the latest free download done on my friends m/c. Other times I have seen that there are issues running a war file that runs on Tomcat but runs on WAS after lot of customization for WAS.
  • The corporations like this however, the product may need better vibrant community of users where issues can be discussed.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Jboss CLI is a great tool but we had trouble using it to get values that are displayed on Jboss GUI. It also has limitations parsing the applications.xml files and we had to use a mix of jboss-cli and linux bash commands to automate certain application administrative tasks.
  • JBoss doesn't really provides performance tuning recommendations. It would have been nice if it could learn from the current demand vs current settings for things like connection pool, server configurations, garbage collection etc.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
IBM
Mostly we will be renewing unless the strategic direction changes drastically or there are other complelling external circumstances. We've been on a multi year project to modernize our legacy applications and that effort will continue for the foreseeable future.
Read full review
Red Hat
We are planning to migrate away from Jboss to Tomcat as Jboss has shown not interest in supporting OSGi which is heavily used at our shop
Read full review
Usability
IBM
WebSphere Application Server is used across our organization. Most projects use this for Java products and applications. Being robust and scalable makes it even more usable. We love using WebSphere Application Server due to its configuration management ability made simple and vast across all java related parameters. It is dependent on the features and upgrades and IBM releases some great upgrades to WebSphere Application Server.
Read full review
Red Hat
JBoss overall is easy to use. The installation and deployment of applications are quick. Documentations and support are also readily available.
Read full review
Performance
IBM
Deploys fairly quick enough and like the roll-out update feature decreasing the downtime and also plays well with other integration tools as well.
Read full review
Red Hat
Usually, Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform is good at performance and well suited for high traffic Java EE-based applications, but we have faced hard times performance tuning it for our specific needs. The product would be nicer if they would add a performance diagnostic and recommendations feature to it.
Read full review
Support Rating
IBM
IBM was quick to respond when we had an issue with our specific infrastructure. We raised a PMR, which they picked up quickly and updated us about every step of the way. We had an appropriate fix for quite a business critical issue within a fortnight, which was impressive!
Read full review
Red Hat
Fast response.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
IBM
Cleo Integration Clould has many bells and whistles; however, when we added more maps and trading partners, it really slowed down. We found that the Cleo support was very slow to respond and there was a language barrier. IBM Websphere had better customer support and its processing was much faster than Cleo Integration Cloud
Read full review
Red Hat
We selected JBoss because of compatibility with EJB's. We currently are trying to reduce our footprint and will highly consider using Tomcat.
Read full review
Return on Investment
IBM
  • Continuous uptime of the business applications we manage
  • It's now much simpler for me to build and deploy cloud-native applications.
  • Because it can offload for me management and maintenance of the application server to IBM I can focus on the development, deployment and testing of the applications which is more important
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Improved delivery timelines due to easy out of the box setup.
  • It is a cheap subscription-based/open-source Java EE-based application server. This reduces the overall cost of delivery.
Read full review
ScreenShots