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

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs Oracle GlassFish comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Server
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (5th)
Oracle GlassFish
Ranking in Application Server
9th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Server category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 11.9%, up from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle GlassFish is 2.3%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Server
 

Featured Reviews

Saleem Shar - PeerSpot reviewer
Compatible, stable, and scalable
IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license. I have never encountered any issues when installing and deploying applications, as it never goes down. Currently, there are two versions of WebSphere Application Server: the old version, known as WebSphere Application ND, and the newer version, Liberty, which is Docker-based. I have experience with both and have never encountered any issues. I believe that WebSphere Application Server is a great feature.
it_user517413 - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers EE Support. I would like to see integration with MQ systems.
The products offers EE support. It offers ease of use. I would like to see integration with MQ systems.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Without the Admin Console it would be very hard to configure JVM settings, JDBC datasources, mail session settings, and security providers."
"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 product offers good performance."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"The solution is very stable and robust."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is the best in terms of scalability and performance, as well as the support for managing distributed transactions."
"The scalability of the product is quite good."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"The products offers EE support."
 

Cons

"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"What could be improved in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its interconnection with other products, for example, Kafka. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is a better graphical user interface."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see support for the Arabic language."
"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 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 installation has room for improvement."
"In spite of the solution's robustness, it is expensive and a bit difficult to support."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"I would like to see integration with MQ systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"WebSphere Application Server is expensive, so it may not be a good option for small companies."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The price of this product is higher than that of competitors."
"The licensing cost is 1,000 of euros for a 30-year table."
"My company is on a perpetual or permanent license agreement with IBM WebSphere Application Server. There's also a pay-per-use option, but customers rarely choose that option. Most of the customers are on the perpetual license deal that's all-inclusive. As the license cost is quite expensive, I'm rating it two out of five."
"The pricing is a little expensive."
"It's expensive."
"I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Server solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Government
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
The product is expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I think in some moments, the security was a little bit more complex to configure when it was delegated to other systems, making it an area where improvements are required.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Application Server
GlassFish
 

Learn More

 

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
TravelMuse, Clarity Accounting
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle, Apache, Red Hat and others in Application Server. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.