We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and Tomcat based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"Starting with version 8, WAS provides a special folder called monitor deployment. Once you put the .war or .ear file in there, it is deployed automatically without human intervention. This greatly helps us in our continuous integration server. Once the deployment binary is ready, we write a script to copy it to that folder and then, voila! The application is up and running and accessible from its context root."
"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"The scalability of the product is quite good."
"The VPN service is quite useful."
"The solution has good performance."
"What's most valuable in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its resilience. When you use the solution, you know that after the communication has been done, there will be no doubt that the data has reached its destination."
"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."
"Web apps are very easy to deploy."
"Tomcat has connectors like REST requests to connect the front end. Also, some parts of the inter-system communication go through REST. External connections with third parties occasionally involve both REST and SOAP protocols. Tomcat is versatile in accommodating these various communication methods."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it supports Java Enterprise."
"The solution has very robust functionality."
"I love Tomcat for its scalability, reliability, availability, and steadiness."
"The most valuable feature is how simple it is to deploy the solution."
"The deployment process is very fast."
"Tomcat is a simple, light environment, whereas the full Red Hat Fuse solution is heavier."
"I think that this is a good product but I think that the cloud environment could be improved. I think that the future is in the utilization of the product in a product as a service way which is something that is lacking at this moment."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"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."
"Based on the field and based on the build that was provided, we've noticed a lot of constraints in terms of the performance now."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"Installing or configuring a WAS server instance as a Windows Service causes a lot of problems, especially when the server needs credentials to stop."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"The business logic side of it is sort of missing in the sense that if I want to track and measure velocity, it is not really available. You have to buy another application and embark on a separate implementation. Instead of having different licensing, IBM DataPower should be integrated with WebSphere. It will allow us to build the business layer and rules a lot more efficiently, rather than developing rules within the application. It would be good if we can set up the business layer through parametrization rather than development. IBM DataPower has the business rule and the controls, and if it can be integrated, it would be fantastic. It will help the application in working better in terms of security features and business logic. If you're going to use it for open banking, you will be able to monitor velocity on the total pricing."
"The current procedure appears complex and could benefit from a more straightforward solution."
"The stability must be improved."
"The setup is complex and could be improved."
"I would also like to see a dashboard with some integrations in order to see the logs and trace performance easier."
"Sometimes, the UI part does not run properly, or the server goes down."
"The interface is not user-friendly."
"If it could support the driver's VIN, they can run natively without the GBM. Now, we can run what we call the native cloud application that doesn't require GBM. If Tomcat can support that, it's going to improve performance and backup."
"The solution's interface and backup features could be better."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Server with 26 reviews while Tomcat is ranked 2nd in Application Server with 46 reviews. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Tomcat is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tomcat writes "A lightweight tool that offers efficiency in terms of memory and resource usage". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Oracle WebLogic Server, IBM BPM and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas Tomcat is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, JBoss, IIS, Caucho Resin and TmaxSoft JEUS. See our IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Tomcat report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.
