Red Hat Fuse vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator comparison

"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."

"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."

"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."

"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."

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

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

"The initial setup process is quite straightforward."

"The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful."

"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."

"I like the user-friendly system and development of the service-oriented architecture."

"The customer service executives are very responsive."

"In my opinion, the most valuable aspect of this solution is its extensive range of adaptors and connectors. This feature holds significant importance and provides great value to users."

"WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide."

"The solution's customer service is good."

"The stability is excellent."

"The connectors have been the most impactful features for handling integrations. I can use these connectors when I need specific connectivity with a third party, like a core banking system in BFSI. I don't need to do all the development. I take the specific connector, put in the IP address and password, and it takes care of everything."

"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."

"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."

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

"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."

"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."

"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."

"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."

"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."

"One of the reasons that we are looking for a replacement is their way of defining integration. The language of the XML structures that I use to describe the integrations are not that standard, and it's not easy to find people who are familiar with this approach."

"The setup can be difficult for those not familiar with the solution."

"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."

"The customization can be a bit difficult."

"If I have to buy software, then it becomes expensive for me."

"They should introduce better pricing for small companies."

"The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems."

"In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience."

"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."

"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."

"After doing some Googling and comparisons, the main standouts were MuleSoft and Red Hat Fuse. One of the big factors in our decision to go with Fuse was the licensing cost. It was cheaper to go with Fuse."

"The most important feature of Fuse is the cost. It is open source and a cheap option for an ESB. So, most of the clients in the Middle East and Asian countries prefer this ESB. Other ESBs, like MuleSoft and IBM API Connect, are pretty expensive. Because it is open source, Red Hat Fuse is the cheapest solution, providing almost every integration capability."

"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."

"This is an expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."

"We found other solutions were more costly."

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

"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."

"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."

"It is a low-cost solution."

"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."

"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."

"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."