We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Application Server and Windows Process Activation Services based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure."Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments."
"The VPN service is quite useful."
"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."
"WebSphere Application Server's best features include the data subscription and connection viewer."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the central console, that allows you to see all of the activated and deactivated computers."
"It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving."
"Initial setup is very simple. Just use the IBM Installation Manager and add the packages. The install wizard takes care of the rest. The only thing that can be difficult is to find the right packages on the IBM website, because of all the changes that IBM does on its website(s)."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"The installation has room for improvement."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
"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."
"The licensing could be improved, and I would like it to give the longevity of the lifespan of the visions. In the next release, I would like to be able to download and extract the files so that I can just use my application server."
"The stability of the solution needs improvement."
More IBM WebSphere Application Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM WebSphere Application Server is ranked 5th in Application Infrastructure with 26 reviews while Windows Process Activation Services is ranked 23rd in Application Infrastructure. IBM WebSphere Application Server is rated 7.8, while Windows Process Activation Services is rated 4.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Application Server writes "Compatible, stable, and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Windows Process Activation Services writes "Central console enables us to see all of the activated and deactivated computers but it has poor alerts and frustrating technical support". IBM WebSphere Application Server is most compared with JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, JBoss, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and IBM BPM, whereas Windows Process Activation Services is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework and IIS.
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.