

Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) and Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) compete in web server and application deployment platforms. IIS has the upper hand due to its seamless integration with Windows environments, while JBoss EAP stands out with its advanced J2EE capabilities.
Features: IIS offers seamless integration with Windows, supporting application isolation and secure publishing. It runs efficiently with Microsoft products, enhancing performance and management. JBoss EAP provides advanced J2EE capabilities, scalability across multiple OS, and a modular architecture that enhances Java application deployment.
Room for Improvement: IIS needs better compatibility with non-Microsoft platforms and improved documentation for setup and security. JBoss EAP requires better automation, cloud integration, and reduced support costs.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IIS benefits from easy deployment on Windows and strong Microsoft support. JBoss EAP is flexible with cloud deployments but requires improved support services for quicker issue resolution.
Pricing and ROI: IIS is cost-effective with a Windows license, showing quick ROI with Microsoft tech integration. JBoss EAP has higher upfront costs but offers scalable subscriptions and ROI through enhanced Java application support.
It should be more user-friendly overall, because unless you know how IIS works as a Microsoft product, a system admin cannot just manage it.
This flexibility translates to a lower total cost of ownership.
There are typically no significant issues.
Microsoft provides a lot of online documentation to consult before speaking to an expert.
I would rate the support from Microsoft very high because I definitely got all the help during the testing time of the development kit while we were configuring features on our on-premises server.
Users can find discussions about common problems, solutions, and documentation within the community.
We receive support from RDS and Red Hat, and the response time and quality meet our expectations.
I would rate the scalability of IIS as a six, mainly due to integration issues since it cannot integrate with other environments.
It depends on the server environment and the presence of a UPS for power backup.
It was secured for us, as we launched the product, and people were accessing it from India and Virginia, and we had no problem.
I would give it a nine out of ten for stability.
I would rate IIS's stability as an eight out of ten.
It is quite stable for our needs.
It should be more user-friendly because unless you know how IIS works as a Microsoft product, a system admin cannot just manage it.
It's influenced by the server's service performance.
If I compare IIS to other web servers such as Apache, which can be deployed in other environments like Linux, I find IIS is mostly used for simple things.
Making it lighter and more modular would probably be beneficial.
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.
If you have a Windows license, there is no additional cost for IIS.
We never had any pricing issue, but I don't know if it is competitive or not.
JBoss is the cheaper option out of the three when compared to WebSphere and WebLogic.
The price is somewhat high for an enterprise, however, it depends on organizational negotiations.
It is easy to publish websites with SSL, and it integrates well within the local environment and cloud.
The configurations are simple, making it very easy to use and to set up everything.
The best features of IIS are that you can design your own website and manage it yourself, creating as many websites as you want.
Built-in metrics and subsystem isolation, where every subsystem logging, messaging, or web services can be tuned independently, provide fine-grained control over performance and behavior.
It allows for simple modification of applications and provides better clustering capabilities.
JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) | 15.1% |
| IIS | 5.8% |
| Other | 79.1% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 28 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 11 |
| Large Enterprise | 21 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 9 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 17 |
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) provides scalable, secure, and reliable infrastructure for Java applications, offering high availability, modular architecture, and smooth integration with new technologies.
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is tailored for deploying and managing web and application servers, with a strong focus on Java applications, APIs, and core business systems. It ensures easy setup and cost-effectiveness, accommodating high availability and clustering enhancements like session replication via Infinispan. While managing configurations and deployments effectively, EAP facilitates flexible deployment modes and enhanced security using OpenID Connect. However, areas needing improvement include customization options, runtime diagnostics, integration capabilities, documentation, and technical support. Automation needs expansion, pricing options could be more competitive, and better alignment with Jakarta EE is suggested for modernization.
What are the standout features of Red Hat JBoss EAP?Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) finds application across industries such as finance, web development, and enterprise middleware services. Its capabilities are demonstrated in managing banking transactions, supporting legacy systems, integrating with external APIs, and fulfilling enterprise needs in installation, configuration, automation, and security tasks.
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.