What advice do you have for others considering IBM Integration Bus?

I would recommend IBM Integration Bus to other people. I rate the overall solution as ten out of ten.

I would recommend IBM Integration Bus because of its scalability and high stability. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I recommend the IBM Integration Bus based on my experience using it for some time. We've successfully implemented a complete service-oriented architecture in our organization using it. As far as output is concerned, we've successfully implemented a lot of service-oriented architecture with IBM Integration. It's also been a success story for us in our organization and others. That's why I recommend it. It's a better option to adopt. It's a good thing. For an overall rating, I think I would give it an eight out of ten. I'll leave two points for potential improvements.

Overall, I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the product a ten out of ten.

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

I find it to be a highly regarded solution. If you are considering the implementation of an Enterprise Service Bus, this product emerges as a robust and effective solution for your business needs. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

Overall, I rate IBM Integration Bus a nine out of ten.

We sometimes get stuck in the managed energy of the integration. Some staff come from different countries, and sometimes there's a language barrier. It's not always a hundred percent clear what's required, and then there are too many options within the framework that can go wrong. The solution then requires a systems specialist to pull the process straight again. The downside is the specific knowledge required to do that. And when, as an analyst, you have an overview of the process and ask, "Why is it stuck?" And then you need to dig into details when the system should unequivocally tell you where the problem is. Is it the function? Is it debugging? And when guys tell me that the XYZ programming team hasn't delivered, I should instantly be able to see in the system what the issue is. However, once the solution is set up, it's solid. I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten. I've just done a comparative analysis. Regarding capability, the IBM Integration Bus is an eight or a nine. Most of my clients operate on-prem. The installation is not easy enough with the setup and everything behind it. Off-prem on the cloud is much better for us, and the libraries are much bigger. But it doesn't have the granularity that IBM offers.

I rate IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I am using the latest version of the solution. We use Jenkins to deploy the applications we build on IBM Integration Bus. My organization is one of the largest IT service providers, with hundreds of customers across the globe. We depend on IBM for patches when there are some issues in the production environment. I am a developer, and I work in solution development. I have worked with multiple organizations for multiple accounts. I would recommend the solution to others. IBM Integration Bus is a leading product. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this product as it's an IBM product. However, it all depends on the use case. If it's heavy machine-based transactions, I recommend IBM Integration Bus. But if it's API-based, I would recommend another solution. On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM Integration Bus a six.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

They can converge other products, ESB, or SOAR architecture. I may recommend IBM as a solution tool for a business if they are looking for a stable environment. They will find support on the community forum. I would rate IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten.

In the modern integrations in the EPAs world, IBM Integration Bus is not well fitted, because if we have legacy systems, it is fine, but if you want to manage the EPA, govern the EPA to allow people to choose the different platforms, such as the cloud platform, Mule CloudHub I would not recommend it. For the legacy integrations, I can recommend this solution. I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

My advice to others is this is a great solution if you can afford it. I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten. We are currently looking at other vendors, such as MuleSoft, to see what their offerings are.

It is a really good product to use if there are lots of applications that need to be integrated in your enterprise. It is a very good solution for enterprise application integration and exposing your product's features to the external client through APIs. I have worked with other tools related to IIB, such as API Gateway and API configuration tools, in the past. They do provide a very good solution for your business if you are planning to expose your business assets by creating APIs. You can develop an API in IIB and configure it in API Connect. You can have that gateway on top of the solution. This is another feature you can leverage using IIB. Based on my experience with this product, I would rate it an eight out of 10. This reduction of two points doesn't mean that it is not as good as other products.

We are customers of the vendor. From a development perspective, there are nearly 40 people using this solution in our organization, although we have thousands of customers who do so indirectly. The solution probably covers more than 95 percent of the integration requirements. I rate IBM Integration Bus as a seven out of ten.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It is a good product. A lot of new products have come into the market, such as Tibco, MuleSoft, but this product still exists, and clients do believe in this product.

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.

I recommend this solution, it's an industry standard product. I rate this solution eight out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to developers. I rate IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten.

I am not a partner for IBM. That said, IBM has used me for consultation issues and training sources. I used to be a partner, maybe six years ago. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

90 percent of days the solution is on the client enrollment. We are hoping to encounter good business cases, involving integration planning, as the trend is for people to gradually transition to the cloud, the government initiative being that involving Azure. As we are a service provider, I cannot give you exact figures about the number of users in our organization who are making use of the solution. As mentioned, this depends on the customer, with each one involving its own user type. I would, of course, recommend this solution to others. I rate IBM Integration Bus as an eight out of ten.

We are customers and end-users. I'd rate the solution around a seven out of ten. I would advise companies to evaluate and consider the options and whether they make sense vis-a-vis the benefit they hope to derive is worth the while. IBM is not cheap. They need to consider costs and make sure they have internal resources available to them. Those using the solution need to be well trained. Otherwise, the company will end up depending on third parties for everything, and that will drive up the costs further. I'd also suggest companies implement such a solution early. Load balancing is very critical in our experience. We didn't implement load balancing immediately, and that affected us. As a company is implementing, it should consider load balancing. Rather than invest on the on-prem, a company should consider the cloud. We did on IBM Unix servers on-prem, and that's pretty expensive.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.

This is a product that I can recommend. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

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.

When I compare it to other products that are available in the marketplace, I rate it better than others because it's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle. I also use Oracle, and I prefer IBM Integration Bus to Oracle. On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM Integration Bus an eight.

I would rate IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten. We are looking forward to the pricing packaging because we do like the product, but we are don't go for it because the price is too high and we not able to sell it to our customer.

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.

I would recommend this solution if you are not doing any XML conversion or data mining and just want to use a message flow, such as reading a file and transporting to another location and then calling some message and integrating it with an existing system such as Salesforce. If you have a lot of integration, I would recommend hiring some experienced people for it. IBM Integration Bus is a very big product, and people don't know even 20% of this product. If people have good knowledge of it, they can really do a lot of stuff. Based on my understanding, its complexity is the reason why people don't have good expertise in this product. I am an experienced Java professional, but I am facing a lot of difficulties in understanding IBM Integration Bus. I would rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten. It needs improvement for data mining, DFDL, and schema converter. There should also be more documentation and information in the IBM Knowledge Center.

IBM Integration Bus is a good product and I would recommend it for enterprise customers. I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We're IBM customers. We don't have a business relationship with IBM. The solution is deployed on an underlying platform in the traditional MQ. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, however, it's not user friendly. That said, it works really well.

It is a little hard to suggest a product for someone else without knowing anything about their situation. I would surely recommend it for companies that have lots of applications that they want to integrate. This is mostly what I would recommend it for. If you want a platform that seamlessly integrates your different applications, IBM Integration Bus for you. On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate IBM Integration Bus as something like seven to eight. For the time being, I will give it a seven. I am pretty much satisfied with the product, but there are certainly ways I have mentioned in which it could improve.

In summary, I can recommend this product because it is easy and straightforward to learn and use. It is also stable and has a good market share. All of the features that I have needed already exist. If a developer would like to shift and try becoming an integration developer, then this is a good product to work with. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're IBM partner-resellers. The reason we've implemented the solution is driven more by our clients' demands. The clients want IBM Integration Bus, or they already have some investment in IBM Integration Bus. We want to build capability in it to support the clients. We don't have a level of experience with the solution. My personal advice to others is to start small so that you give yourself a good preliminary base that's not too overwhelming. Most clients want to do everything with this solution, which is fine. However, it's always better to start small with a departmental project, as opposed to an enterprise-wide kind of thing. It is better to start small and tackle a practical project and get used to everything before going really big. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. I would recommend it.

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

IBM is huge once you start it up. There's not a lot of coding, not a lot of method to the mapping, and they have the need for application software management. I'd rate it a nine out of 10. It's stable across multiple platforms and across multiple applications. They're very strong and a trusted brand. They are patient and good friends. One of the only challenges is that it is hard to teach people.

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.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

My advice for anybody implementing this solution for the first time is to have people from IBM on-site to help you establish the operating procedures and the development procedures. My understanding is that the new release will have a lot of new features, including support for Docker containers. At this point, I don't have any requirements for the new release. It has also been rebranded. This is a good solution from a technical and operational point of view, but they should really remove this technically complicated license controlling. It is very complicated software that you have to install. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

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.

This is a very large and complex product. It takes several people to understand every feature in it because nobody understands it completely. I am an architect but I also develop. I really love this product and the graphical way of doing things, but there are limitations because you are not doing hundred percent programming. Instead of programming, you are solving some complex functionality needs by configuring, and you have to understand how to do it. For anybody who is implementing this solution, it is important to say that even though I am senior, I'm a junior when it comes to this solution. I was only brought in to work on this two years ago. It requires many years of experience to be good at it. You can't just jump on and be skilled at using it. Even when the people from IBM came and worked on prior applications, they were having challenges. Of course, the nature of the problem that IBM Integration Bus solves is challenging. All of this said, I like the graphical interface and I don't mind working on projects that are long-term. For most of the features, I would rate them ten out of ten. But when it comes to understanding transaction related settings (and other solutions provided via the configuration settings), and the fact that there are so many documents you have to read to find one small thing, I would rate that area a five or six out of ten. Overall, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

IIB very flexible.nearly limitless , You can easily overload it with duties that it's not meant to hold. Organizations needs to have strong their architecture team and SOA governance during and After implementation .to avoid overloading the ESB Layer. I would give IBM Integration Bus an 11 out of 10. I have tried solutions from competitors Brands. There is no comparison.

IBM recently changed the name of this solution to IBM API-Connect. With the new name, they have added two new features, such as connecting to the cloud.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10, because of: * The community. * They provide freeware. * The support that IBM provides. * It fits its purpose. IIB is one of the top-rated solution in this category. If looking for a tool which is SOA compliance, you can blindly go for this particular tool. The most important criteria when selecting a vendor is support. We are looking for the 24/7 support in respect to that particular product. It should be compliant within our business requirements. Technology is evolving day-by-day and should have an additional features added-on as long as we are required to implement those features, e.g. product security. We are using different encrypted algorithms on encryption screens, and these functionalities are widely adopted by IBM.

IIB is a great product. It could use some minor improvements, such as: * IIB toolkit needs design overhaul; maybe some themes. * Current aggregation implementation should be deprecated. MQ independent, as well as an intuitive solution, should be proposed. * App Connect Enterprise (IIB's newer version) might solve the above issue.