Red Hat Fuse vs TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus comparison

"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."

"With a premium, one can get support 24 hours."

"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."

"The solution has more tooling and options."

"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."

"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."

"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."

"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."

"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."

"The stability of this solution is excellent."

"It is easy to develop. It has a very wide range of features. The older versions are very stable, and there are no issues with the product."

"The solution is very stable."

"The most valuable features are the monitoring, ease of use, and easy to understand development GUI."

"The product’s most valuable feature is stability."

"The GUI and IDE features of this solution are easy to work with and to develop. We find application management easy using this solution. It is a stable product"

"TIBCO has the platform in terms of speed and ease of use."

"I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."

"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."

"For improvement, they can consider the way we collaborate with other applications...Right now, in Red Hat Fuse, everything is not available under one umbrella."

"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."

"The web tools need to be updated."

"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."

"It might help if, in the documentation, there were a comments section or some kind of community input. I might read a page of documentation and not fully understand everything, or it might not quite answer the question I had. If there were a section associated with it where people could discuss the same topic, that might be helpful because somebody else might have already asked the question that I had."

"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."

"I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors."

"Migration to cloud solutions or products should be made convenient, transparent, and easily understandable."

"In the configuration, where we need to customize, it takes more time that we expect it to, ideally."

"The initial setup process could be easier."

"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."

"If TIBCO could be able to sort the size of their base image in the Container edition, it would be really marvelous. Right now it's around 299 MB. We'd really want it to reduce to a few MBs."

"The solution is very expensive when you use multiple components, it would b better if this could be reduced."

"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."

"My company pays for the license of Red Hat Fuse yearly. At the end of the day, it's a low-cost solution, and its support licenses are still very decently priced versus bigger operators such as IBM, etc. Red Hat Fuse is much more affordable than other solutions. On a scale of one to five, with one being cheap and five being extremely expensive, I'm rating its pricing a one."

"You need to pay for the license. It's not free."

"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."

"We are paying around $24 million across five years."

"In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."

"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."

"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."

"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."

"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."

"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."

"The licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."

"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."

"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."

"The price is on the higher side. For the same price, if I go to the previous version, I would have got a lot more capacity with similar kinds of features."