JBoss Reviews

We primarily use the solution for business processes and mostly from the level of approval, within the organization.

The product integrates well with Java applications.

The software is basically decently placed, commercially as well as for production.

The solution is quite stable. 

It's perfect for the needed usage of the customer.

We haven't come across any missing features. 

The initial setup is a bit complex. 

I'd like the product to move more towards the cloud.

The frequent updates, and the life cycle, should be a little longer. They keep on changing versions and versions should have a longer life.

Even if the client buys an extended life cycle, they should support the customers who are loyal customers and extend all their possible support to the client when a customer is buying a subscription as well as extended life cycle support. The OEM should want to give additional extended support to the customer because.

I've been using the solution for five or six years. 

The stability is very good. There are no issues with bugs or glitches. the performance is good. 

The solution is scalable. It's not locked to any specific server, so the licenses are flexible.

Technical support is okay. The support comes from the GSS, the global support center of Red Hat. The problem is that support is always via email. They do not give support via telephone. Email support takes a bit of a time, however, they do give you some sort of solution. There is no typical SLA.

The solution is a little complex in terms of implementation. It is not a straightforward thing, as there is integration with multiple things which makes it not a straightforward implementation.

In terms of maintenance, it all depends upon the case and the departments. For one implementation unit, you need at least one person.

Licensing is flexible. It comes in a subscription model, so it doesn't actually lock to a specific server. That's one of the good things. Licensing costs vary from company to company. It depends on the requirements and size. Definitely, it is better than the proprietary cost. Everything is included under the license. there are extra fees. 

I don't remember the version we're using, however, it'll be the latest version at that time of implementation. These are on an in-house data center.

It's pretty easy to implement from the Java perspective, however, equally challenging to integrate with other applications or different databases. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use the solution for the installation of the hardware and microservices.

The solution is robust and provides good support.

The solution's documentation could be better.

We have been using the solution for around sixteen years.

I rate the solution's stability a seven or eight. It needs improvement as we need to do the troubleshooting for some instances.

It is a scalable solution. It supports both vertical and horizontal scaling. I rate its scalability an eight or nine.

The solution's technical support is good. Although, it depends on the type of support contract one has purchased.

The solution's setup process is straightforward for me as I have prior experience using it. I rate the process an eight. It takes a day to complete a basic setup.

It is an open-source solution.

I rate the solution an eight. There are better solutions available, like WebLogic, with high scalability.

We use JBoss mainly for application deployments and application servers.

JBoss is not as reliable and stable as WebLogic.

I have been using JBoss for four years.

Once installed and deployed, the solution is stable and works fine in the production environment.

When we need to scale, we install different instances of JBoss. We don't rely on clustering or specific features in JBoss.

WebLogic is a more reliable and stable tool than JBoss.

The pricing of JBoss is more reasonable than that of WebLogic.

Customers use JBoss instead of WebLogic. Although WebLogic is more feature-rich, its licensing is very high compared to JBoss. I am satisfied with JBoss's management and monitoring capabilities. I would recommend JBoss to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I use the platform mainly for presentations and meetings. It is also used to implement web applications.

JBoss has made it very easy to implement web applications.

The meetings in JBoss are very easy, and we can see what's there on our laptops and mobiles. We can also comment over there.

I don't know much about these aspects. However, it would be great if the product came with a feature where the remarks made on the board can be saved on an individual's laptop to make it more user-friendly.

I have been using JBoss for around six months.

It is a stable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

I do not have much insight into scalability. At present, we have around six users.

It is easy to set up.

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. I would recommend this solution to others.

JBoss is a product that we implement for our clients. It is used as an application server and a web server. 

The most valuable feature is the UI.

This is a lightweight server.

The support should be bundled with the Red Hat OS support because as it is now, these are two separate costs. Having the support combined with Red Hat support would be an improvement.

We have been using JBoss for a couple of years.

We have not had any problems with the stability.

This is a scalable product.

Our application support team will contact JBoss support if they have an issue, but so far they have not needed to. We have not seen any major or critical problems.

We also have Oracle WebLogic in the company and some of the developers prefer to use JBoss. Three or four of our applications use JBoss and the remaining ones, which is most of them, use WebLogic.

In terms of memory, it is better than Oracle WebLogic.

Our in-house team is responsible for deployment and maintenance. We have one person from the infrastructure team to help install and tune it. A second person performs day-to-day troubleshooting on it.

Once we deliver and deploy the server, there is another team to support the application.

This price of JBoss is cheaper than similar solutions like Oracle WebLogic. We pay for a maintenance license, but it is not expensive.

JBoss is what we settled on when we were searching for alternatives to WebLogic.

My advice is that for anybody who is searching for a lightweight application or web server, JBoss is one of the options that I recommend. We plan to continue using it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We provide the very basic JBoss setup for the implementation and the setup.

The solution's support is very good for repairing components. We just need to raise a case, and the support team will reply.

The solution's pricing could be improved because it is not cheap.

I have been working with JBoss for a couple of years.

I rate JBoss an eight out of ten for stability.

Two to three of our customers are using JBoss.

I rate JBoss an eight out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup could be simple or very complex, depending on the solution.

It takes weeks to deploy JBoss. The solution's deployment includes downloading the installer and then deploying the server.

JBoss is an expensive solution. Customers need to pay for a yearly license for JBoss.

One engineer is required for the deployment and maintenance of JBoss.

I would recommend users to go ahead and use JBoss.

Overall, I rate JBoss a five out of ten.

I am working on a deal where JBoss is being renewed. It is a legacy version. The use case is around a financial institution that enables banks to do peer-to-peer transactions. Finance is the core business of the companies I'm working with.

It is a Java-based product, so it is pretty straightforward. It is pretty easy from a developer's perspective. It is also pretty reliable and scalable.

It can have automation features. Everybody is focused right now on automation. In terms of saving cost, automation is always the first thing that comes to light.

It is pretty reliable.

We have seen big enterprises using JBoss. So, it doesn't matter what the size of the organization is. JBoss can fit regardless of the size.

In terms of the number of users, in the organization I'm working with, there are 20 developers and a couple of infrastructure guys. They have a lot of developers in this particular organization.

There are no concerns in terms of support. They received support directly from Red Hat.

It is pretty straightforward from my perspective. The deployment duration depends on what you're trying to do with this solution, but it is pretty straightforward and can be deployed in a couple of hours.

They went for what they were comfortable with, and they weren't much interested in new solutions.

Its recommendation depends on the vision of the organization. We need to have that understanding first before we provide them some sort of solution. It will depend on what they already have in place or what they're planning to do. Customers are moving to the cloud, and there are other alternatives out there, but of course, it will depend on understanding the journey of the customer.

I would rate JBoss an eight out of ten, just for how common it is to use Java as a language.

I have seen a few implementations where the JBoss application server is used. Initially, the applications were hosted on licensed servers like IBM WebSphere and BEA WebLogic. But, due to the license cost, we advised our client to shift to an open source application server. With open source, we had a choice of going with Apache Tomcat and JBoss. We chose JBoss as it's far more scalable, secure and comes with support from the vendor.

The server supports Windows as well as Linux OS, which is an added advantage. JBoss seems to be a well-rounded application server in the market which supports scalability and is easy to set-up and to deploy.

Compared to IBM and BEA, JBoss provides the best support in the virtualized environment, and it also comes with multiple configurations which help in easy roll-out of the applications.

The application deployment sometimes can be a tedious task if you are a novice.

The earlier application servers - IBM/BEA - had a very huge license cost. Moreover, the cost went up as we wanted to scale the application for more users. 

Also, the application servers comes with poor support in virtualized environment.