IBM Integration Bus Reviews

The primary use case of this solution is as a corporate integration bus, between different financial applications. We use IBM Integration Bus (IIB) with IBM MQ for asynchronous interaction. Additionally, web services for synchronized integration such as REST APIs, SOAP and HTTP Interfaces with XML interaction. For instance, it uses for the integration of the Banking front end with the banking core application. IBM Integration Bus installed on-premise.

Before, we used to use client-server applications with strong interaction. Using the integration bus we quickly broke through the border between client-server and service-oriented architecture. Additionally, we were able to quickly link many other financial services with core bank system or exposed some API for financial services.

This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn.

There are many connectors to different sources and it's easy to scale.

Also, it is easy to parametrize the integration of bus applications during building or deployment. For instance, set up names of the queues, set up binded services URL, set up or change user-defined parameters.

I like the IBM Integration Bus and I hope that it will change in micro-service architecture. My understanding is that it will change to be less connected, and less depends on the operating system or the hardware resources.

I would like to be able to run and install this solution on different platforms and using containers and using modern micro-service and cloud environments.

This solution is quite stable. We use this solution every day.

There are many financial services to be integrated with different APIs, so it was easy to develop it with Integration Bus.

This solution is scalable. As an example, If you are using web services and you want to upscale several connections, we do it by changing one parameter in the application: "Number of additional instances".

Also, it is easier to scale a synchronized interaction with MQ to change one parameter to indicate how many instances you want to execute simultaneously. On the other hand, you can deploy the same application on different integration servers.

We have not used the technical support. We found all of the information that we needed with the IBM documentation.

We used to use client-service applications with strong integration between application. The company implemented many other applications with different interfaces and aimed to link with external services. So that we started using Integration bus for integration legacy application with new applications.

The initial setup was easy. For Windows, you will run the installation file and you have an environment that is ready to develop an integrated solution.

If you want additional resources such an MQ, or databases, you will have to read the manual to understand how to connect them.

The building and deployment are quick and easy. It only takes a few minutes to deploy, depending on the size of your application, but it's fast.

There are two methods of deployment. You can use the manual deployment method using the drag and drop. On the other hand, you can use command-line interface for building and deployment applications. The application represented as one or some number of .bar file. It's something similar to .ear but other structure inside.

You only really need one person to deploy this solution, but we shared build and responsibility using GitLab tool-chain and Nexus Repository. The first factor is for development and building and the other one is for deployment. We use the same process for different environments. All necessary parametrization inside the application are stored as a file and substituted depend on the deployment environment during the building process.

The implementation was done with our team. Additionally, we used the standard development process for teamwork.

We have gone through different comparative solutions and other integrated systems, and IBM Integration Bus is better for enterprise.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to start with reading the documentation. Have a good understanding of how to integrate Integration Bus with different resources, and to have experience with a synchronized interaction with IBM MQ or Apache Kafka. But IBM MQ is preferable.

Also, it is better to have an understanding of the HTTP Interaction and REST API interaction.

I also suggest people participate in IBM online learning. There are two courses that go over features that are related to integration development. They are very helpful. They also teach how to develop an integration solution, so it is an interesting program.

Additionally, explore the IBM blog about Integration Bus and App-Connect. You can find there a lot of integration patterns.

Other Integration solutions require an application server, but with IBM Integration Bus, it doesn't require a special application server.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a financial institution and we are using this solution for the APIs that we provide.

The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications. The learning curve is not steep and it is something that you can pick up within about two weeks.

There are a lot of inbuilt interfaces like ISO and SAP. Having all of these interfaces already built makes integration very easy and straightforward.

One drawback that I have found is that there are issues with using the Java connector. I was running out of heap space.

I have been working with IBM Integration Bus for three years.

The stability is fantastic.

With respect to scalability, IBM Integration Bus is very good.

I have been in contact with technical support and I found that they were very good.

I have not really used any other ESB solutions.

I was not part of the original deployment.

I like to view comparisons to see what people have to say about similar products because I have just recently changed jobs and my new company is trying to purchase an ESB. Although I fully recommend IBM Integration Bus, I think it is important to look and see if other solutions may be better.

Generally speaking, this is a very good product. It is easy to learn and use, and it is robust as well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten

We use IBM Integration Bus for 600 applications that we're running.

The most valuable feature is the security.

Sometimes migration takes too long.

I have been using this solution for nine years.

It's a stable solution.

It's very scalable. When you deploy the solution, you have the option to create two different policies.

We haven't needed to use technical support very much. We reached out to IBM about a problem we had with HashMap.

I was the developer consultant.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

We are using the solution as an outer layer for all of our API calls we are making outside of our own devices. All APIs integrations are routing through the ESB only. We are using it for IIB server components and the DataPower, which is an API gateway. It is providing us with a security layer because all the outside calls do not have direct communication with our own server, this middle layer is called the ESB. 

The solution has helped my organization because any new integration coming to my backend system, we can easily implement it in a shorter time. This is because the middle layer takes care of all API language conversions or the code conversion, and also does the maintaining of the logs.

Having the solution come from IBM you know you are receiving a product of quality in components and in the services, it is very good.

I do not think there are any improvement areas because it depends on what exactly the use case for this ESB is. Some organizations are having a lot of integration and they will choose a regular ESB. While others will choose the security purpose route, making an extra layer. It depends from organization to organization, to determine how this solution can be improved from their specific use cases. Otherwise, I think that there are not any relevant improvement areas to give.

I used the solution in my last company for a long while.

The solution came to the market a long while ago, it has had time to mature. It is really stable and large organizations can rely on it. Smaller companies could too but it is too expensive.

It is a scalable solution. You can have any number of integration, it depends on the server and how much space you are providing to the IIB servers. We plan to have more than 50 wired integration by the end of the year.

The installation is not easy. You need experts who know how to install this IIB. The common technician will not have the knowledge to do it. You will need assistance installing the solution even though on IBM's website you can download the complete user manual explaining how to install the IIB servers. 

We used a third-party vendor, who help us install the solution and it was not easy. If you have most things in place at the site the whole installation process can take approximately three days. 

To do the complete deployment you will need at least one architecture that understands this IIB solution. It all depends on what kind of IP division architecture you have. Based on the project's scope, you then can define your team. There is no certain number of how many team members is required. It depends on your project, how large it is, and based on that you can decide how much manpower is required.

The solution requires a license and is very expensive here in India. Large organizations will be able to afford it but smaller companies will have a difficult time paying for the solution at the current price.

I am going to continue to use this solution, when you purchase this solution you have spent a lot of money, you have to continue to use it to make a return on investment.

I would recommend this solution if they have a large budget.

I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

I'm responsible for Strategy and Architecture for an IT consulting company they are partners with IBM. 

I like that this solution is suitable for any size company. It's simple to use from a development perspective because the content is easily infiltrated in the eclipse infrastructure. It's also credible in all the application aspects and easy to integrate into the enterprise application landscape. Finally, there is also a good relationship with IBM itself that assists us in implementing. You can really use this architecture but you have to understand the technology itself. It means you can do everything with this technology on condition that implementation is carried out correctly but this is a general term and valid for all solutions on the market. IBM is offering with the Integration Bus a very robust and stable solution.

The solution itself is quite expensive for smaller companies because of a complex architecture setup if you just start. Easier and a more plug and playable solution which make an MVP easier in being able to show the value faster to the customer.

I've been using this solution for about 10 years in different projects and for different customers.

This is a very stable solution.

Scalability depends on the money that you have in your pockets. Technologically speaking, it's a scalable solution. 

I get good support from the IBM technical people. It also depends on your philosophy, how you implement this. I have a lot of very experienced people, but also a good relationship with the laboratories, which is also sometimes necessary when you're doing something new and a highly sophisticated implementation is required. You need to have a support team for the product development. 

The initial setup is straightforward, it's a simple solution. 

Evaluate and define a clear architecture, and set up a governance framework that includes a competence center that will take care of the usage, the licenses which will be needed, and do guarantee the reuse of interfaces and components.

I always suggest carrying out a proof of concept each time. People who are able to set this up and also monitor it, will discover how easy it is to customize and to integrate the architecture. The POC creates familiarity and also an understanding of the skill set required. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

The solution is primarily a middleware. It's security-enabled and we are using the same credentials for development. We plan on making a backend to handle growing requests.

The solution is similar to Adobe X Pro. We can intersect with any of those items.

The scalability is very good.

The integration with other tools is excellent. It integrates well with batch issues.

Overall, the solution works very well.

IBM could improve its connectivity. 

The solution needs to be better integrated with the cloud version of the solution.

The solution is constrained by the environment - whether it's on-premises or the cloud. The cloud seems to be more adaptable.

I've been using the solution since 2014.

The solution is very stable. We haven't found any bugs or glitches. There haven't been crashes. It's quite reliable.

We have more than 20 people that use the solution. We use it on a daily basis. The scalability is good and is simple to expand as necessary.

I didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup is simple enough. Right now, in its entirety, the download is very simple. It's actually a one-click solution.

Deployment takes very little time. It depends mostly on the load and what we are pushing out. However, it usually takes a matter of seconds.

We have 14 people in general on our team using the solution, and they are all able to perform maintenance.

I handled the implementation myself.

I don't have any information about licensing or costs. It's not something that I am in charge of.

We're just IBM customers. We're not partners and we don't have a relationship with the company.

In terms of on-premises vs cloud, I'd suggest users go to the cloud. It obviously depends on the market and the adoption rate.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

IBM Integration Bus is mainly used to integrate banking systems.

IBM Integration Bus' most valuable features are its performance, fast and easy development, and easy support.

Some of the runtime properties need to be improved because if you want to load certificates as sales security, you have to restart the server. There are also some bugs with file transfer protocol.

I've been using IBM Integration Bus for three to four years.

IBM Integration Bus is very stable.

The initial setup was straightforward, and IBM has a great knowledge base to help. I would rate the setup experience as four out of five.

IBM Integration Bus is expensive.

I would give IBM Integration Bus a rating of nine out of ten.

My only client at the moment is a national government bank. Currently, the IBM Integration Bus is the integration platform for all the various departments of the bank. There are probably six or seven major departments across the bank that subscribe to or use the integration services like MessageQ, Broker, or the platform's orchestration capabilities. And we have a team of about 15 people managing it.  

Integration Bus has also been put in place to lay the foundation for hybrid integration into the two specific systems on the cloud. We are still deploying it, so we haven't gotten into any actual use cases yet. In the past, it was relatively easy for the team, but I don't think they've ever leveraged the suite's full capabilities. It hasn't been easy in some instances because the reserve bank is unique. It's not the same as other financial institutions, but we've had challenges on the platform before.

IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box. In terms of new features, we have a roadmap, and it's looking quite comprehensive. However, we may not necessarily need everything they're putting out. I know that's probably driven by global demand. 

I've been dealing with IBM Integration Bus off and on for the last 15 years.

I think IBM support could be faster. It took us a while to resolve our issues because they don't necessarily have the technical resources in our country. We had to source the resources internationally, so it took a while to get that done. But once we got what we needed, IBM resolved it relatively quickly.

Setting up IBM Integration Bus wasn't simple, but we've got a unique environment. We're probably about two or three months behind on our implementation because of unforeseen interoperability problems between Red Hat OpenShift and VMware. We've got a team of about 15 overseeing the deployment, including engineers, developers, and the support staff for the platform.

I think our enterprise license agreement is included with a bundle of products.

I would give IBM Integration Bus a solid eight out of 10. I recommend it for large enterprises but only for specific use cases. You need to have a relatively mature integration practice in your organization to leverage its capabilities fully. So I wouldn't recommend it to startups or somebody new. I'd instead go open source or something relatively easy.