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

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs Microsoft .NET Framework comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 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 Message Broker
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (8th)
Microsoft .NET Framework
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 2.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft .NET Framework is 6.0%, down from 6.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

BrajendraKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability
I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.
David Shlingbaum - PeerSpot reviewer
Old version maintains functionality but lacks current cloud support
Since the version I'm using is many years old, they have been continuously improving. They are always adding features to the language and framework, but I cannot comment from a very old version on what needs to be improved as I'm not completely up to date. There is a challenge and complexity in supporting a very old version of a product that is no longer supported. It's still possible with Microsoft .NET Framework, which isn't the case with many other products. That's a positive aspect. It has limitations when trying to develop new things with Microsoft .NET Framework. But whatever works, continues to work. It always needs improvement, but again, it does not improve when discussing an old version of Microsoft .NET Framework. I think they're always improving, but it's a never-ending process.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The solution has good integration."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"The most valuable feature is customization."
"In-built refactoring and .Net profilers are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The most valuable features for us are web frameworks like MVC, Web API, and WCS."
"The tool offers a lot of support, and there is a lot of knowledge material available, along with a lot of community groups."
"The most valuable thing about Microsoft .NET Framework is that it is an enterprise-grade language and platform."
"Firstly, I appreciate the decision to use Microsoft .NET Framework. I find it to be an excellent language, with a history rooted in providing an alternative to Java, albeit with initial challenges. It is gaining popularity and may be voted the most desirable programming language. What I particularly like about .NET is its language efficiency. While C# is the primary language, the platform also supports others, catering to those inclined towards functional programming. Although I started with Shell, I'm still grasping the concept of functional programming. Despite initial reservations about object-oriented programming, I acknowledge its advantages. .NET is a safer option, and despite criticisms, it has evolved over the years. One notable aspect is .NET's transition to an open platform in recent years, distancing itself from being exclusive to Microsoft engineers. I appreciate the versatility of .NET, enabling code production for a wide range of platforms, presenting a strong competition to Java. It allows targeting practically any physical platform, showcasing its flexibility. These qualities contribute to my positive view of .NET, totaling thirteen aspects that I find appealing."
"The most valuable features are the Domain Controller and the WBFS Manager."
"The solution is not limited in storage, is customizable and simple to use."
 

Cons

"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordingly."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"Microsoft .NET Framework has a steep learning curve, which could be improved."
"The significant challenge is that you need an enterprise-level company to maintain software in Microsoft .NET Framework with a proper structure."
"They should have more training materials available that are specific to .NET. We spend a lot of money training our engineers."
"This solution should include Power BI so that we don't have to use any third-party tools."
"The solution has difficulty integrating with other products. There are no such difficulties if you have the same platform, hardware, and operating system."
"The pricing is a bit expensive."
"I would like more web integration."
"Lacking in auto-scaling."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"The pricing could be cheaper."
"If you want to develop an enterprise-level application, you have to purchase the enterprise-level development license."
"Microsoft .NET Framework is very cost-effective for corporate users."
"It's an expensive solution"
"There is a Community Edition that can be used free of charge, but the licensing cost for the Enterprise version is quite high."
"Microsoft .NET Framework is free of cost."
"The Microsoft .NET Framework is free of charge, without licensing cost."
"The solution is free but you need to pay for a license for the hosting service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Real Estate/Law Firm
13%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...
What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
We use the product for exposing services at the application level, integrating with various architectures like WebSphere, and handling static service creation.
What do you like most about Microsoft .NET Framework?
Microsoft .NET Framework continually innovates, particularly in Visual Studio, which focuses on improving languages, debugging, and .NET functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft .NET Framework?
I don't know about pricing. I'm paying for Visual Studio, even though I'm not using the new version yet. Prices can always be better, but I think for the environment provided, the prices are accept...
What needs improvement with Microsoft .NET Framework?
Since the version I'm using is many years old, they have been continuously improving. They are always adding features to the language and framework, but I cannot comment from a very old version on ...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Message Broker
MS .NET Framework
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Curtin University, Rockwell Automation, Aruba Networks, Insurity Inc., City of Barcelona, Pennsylvania DCNR, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, A1 Telekom Austria AG, Eastman Chemical Company
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Microsoft .NET Framework and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.