Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs JBoss comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 2, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Server
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (5th)
JBoss
Ranking in Application Server
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Application Server category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 12.2%, up from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JBoss is 18.4%, up from 17.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Server
 

Featured Reviews

BharathirajaSukumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient load balancing and the clustering, achieved by using the deployment manager, is valuable
I believe that the system is already good. However, for improvement or enhancement, it is user-friendly, but it could offer better choices on the front end for different aspects or options. Sometimes, I have to search extensively for features, as there are no upfront tabs. There is a lack of visible, easy, user-friendly, and straightforward options for the number of features.
Srinadh  Puli - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation aids installation while management consolidation needs improvement
We are currently using Ansible for Jira installations and all the management tasks. We perform some tasks manually, however, Ansible helps in automating some of these processes I find JBoss to be lightweight and easier to manage compared to WebSphere. It allows for simple modification of…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"IBM WAS is extremely scalable. It is easy to add additional servers and to divide the load over servers in all kinds of ways."
"The integration between IBM tools and applications is very well executed."
"One of the most valuable features might be the stability of the IBM WebSphere Application Server."
"The product offers good performance."
"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"The solution is robust. The connection management and the scalability, which IBM provides to the Stack, are also valuable."
"The support is fast and reliable."
"The most valuable thing about JBoss is how easy it is to install and manage it on-premise, making the process simple."
"JBoss's configuration is straightforward and easy."
"The most valuable feature is the UI."
"JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"JBoss has made it very easy to implement web applications."
"I find JBoss to be lightweight and easier to manage compared to WebSphere."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve the integration."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly. It used to have its own JVM, which presented challenges such as different architecture and memory leaks."
"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."
"It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"In terms of monitoring, the old version was somewhat limited in flexibility, lacking the ability to easily adjust configurations."
"It can have automation features. Everybody is focused right now on automation. In terms of saving cost, automation is always the first thing that comes to light."
"The product could be cheaper."
"The stability of the solution could improve with Microsoft Windows."
"The solution's documentation could be better."
"I would like to see improved booting of applications altogether on one page to manage all data instances from one location, similar to an AWS console."
"Sometimes the console has a glitch."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM WAS base is part of the deal when you purchase IBM FileNet P8 Content Engine."
"The licensing cost is 1,000 of euros for a 30-year table."
"When you purchase Maximo, you get WebSphere for free."
"We used to pay about $100,000-$120,000 US or somewhere around there. That was a bit cost-prohibitive for us to continue."
"The pricing is a little expensive."
"It is very expensive."
"The price of IBM WebSphere Application Server could be less expensive and there is an annual license required for this solution."
"I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs."
"There is no licensing cost. The solution is free to use."
"JBoss is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cost-efficient compared to other products. Pricing is rated an eight out of ten."
"We pay for a maintenance license, but it is not expensive."
"Despite the price increase after being acquired by IBM, JBoss still maintains its competitiveness. The package provided is more geared towards cloud-based deployments, whereas our setup is more traditional, which makes it slightly more expensive for us. As most vendors are transitioning towards cloud-centric solutions, companies like ours need to adapt accordingly."
"Since the solution is freeware, our customers don't need to pay any licensing fees."
"The pricing of JBoss is more reasonable than that of WebLogic."
"I rate the product price as eight on a scale, where one means it is a very cheap solution, and ten points mean that it is a very expensive tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Server solutions are best for your needs.
839,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Computer Software Company
14%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Application Server?
Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
In Korea, when you buy IBM iOS, the WebSphere base version is included with iOS. That means no additional cost.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I find the server okay, however, using the Maker instance, the Moving instance, and the Change instance is a little bit complicated without WebSphere knowledge.
What do you like most about JBoss?
The product's initial setup phase is easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JBoss?
JBoss is the cheaper option out of the three when compared to WebSphere and WebLogic. Though I haven't done a detailed price comparison, the licensing fee is cheaper, and due to its flexibility, th...
What needs improvement with JBoss?
They are trying to make it less heavyweight since app servers often deliver a lot of functionality. Still, if we aren't leveraging them, they can be too much for certain use cases. Making it lighte...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Application Server
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Tata Sky, Nissan, Swedish Board of Agriculture, Novamedia, American Product Distributors, Advanced Micro Devices, Emirates Group, E*TRADE
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. JBoss and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
839,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.