IBM Integration Bus Reviews

We are using Integration Bus for SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture) services. We are using it to connect APIs to servers, we are using it as an integration bus for hosting, and we are hosting our web services over it. I am using and testing this from the QA (Quality Assurance) perspective.  

The Integration Bus has provided us with a certain level of security. For instance, before we used this solution, we were directly connecting to databases through a DB link. We were able to stop that practice and make it more secure using Integration Bus. It has also provided us with the capability to reuse developed services. Services we developed can now be used with multiple systems and we are able to remove duplicate applications due to this advantage.  

Surely something that can be improved is session management. Sometimes sessions hang. Practically every day we hear about session congestion and this kind of thing. Troubleshooting the issue has become a long-standing problem. Where the true problem lies is a challenge for our support team.  

The session management issue may be a bigger problem for us because our support team is not so highly trained. Also, sometimes our developers are not able to dig down to locate the actual problem. To resolve the issue when it occurs, we have to at least restart the server. It is not really solving the problem, it just relieves the symptoms. These session management problems are the basic issues we are having, but otherwise, our services have become better after bringing in the Integration Bus.  

One thing I would like to have added to Integration Bus is a plugin — or some other software, — to enable testing the performance of our services from the application hosted on the IBM service. I think that the users of the system should be able to get something like that and somehow do performance testing on their own. Currently, I have used some studio or some plugin to find these results. Another option is using services that are available that I have also tried. If IBM could provide this same type of testing capability in its application, that that would be great. It would enable us to report to our business on the facts about how much we have improved from the earlier architecture.  

We have been using IBM Integration Bus for the last three years.  

It is a stable product especially with the release of version 10. We had problems with version 9. But now, version 10 was really a lot more stable and a lot of things have improved. We are much more satisfied with the product and stability of the performance. It is fairly rare that we are unable to troubleshoot something. But I think that most of the problems that we have, from my point of view, is because we are not better trained on the product as a whole. Maybe training could resolve some of our troubleshooting issues. Everything may not be the fault of the product.   

We had scaled up the product usage, so I know it is scalable. We were only using it with a few systems in the beginning and now we are using it with a whole bank of systems and all of the systems are integrated tools.  

The IBM partner that we are working with here is System Limited. IBM was not directly supporting us during the installation and if we have issues we work with the IBM partner.  

We did previously have another solution called BixTalk which we were using four to five years ago. One major problem with BizTalk was that we had very few people available who were actually trained on it. Secondly, there were some sever issues as well. We had a synchronization problem on top of that. Because it was so long ago I do not remember all the issues. Maybe we did have some other problems also. But we had a problem with the product support as well.  

From an installation point of view and just initially setting up this product, it required a lot of configuration. The configuration is the harder part of the installation. Otherwise, the installation was done in a few days by our team. I do not remember exactly whether we had any major problems in doing that, but it could be there were problems and I just did not hear about them.  

There were a lot of things to configure, but that was taken care of by a different department. Our operations department would be the group that handled this. So I do not have actual first-hand information because I did not participate in the process.  

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.  

We use this product as an integration point between systems. We use it for logging and transformation of data between backend and frontend.

Our use case involves the communications industry.

The most valuable feature is that it is clear and easy to learn.

There is a community available where I can find a solution if I am facing a problem.

The interface could be more user-friendly.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for about one year.

IBM Integration Bus is stable, although it depends on the efficiency of our code, the network stability, and the infrastructure. It will be stable if all of the applications are running efficiently.

We have a support agreement that is included with our license and whenever we have a problem, we contact them. In my experience, they provide good support. They also provide good material and documents.

I have not used another similar solution by another vendor, although I have been part of projects where other systems had been implemented.

The initial setup is straightforward, especially with Java and EasyCODE.

We make use of tools like bash scripting when we deploy files. When we deploy a single file, it takes about five minutes.

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 use it for migration.

The most valuable feature is that it's robust and its time to market is very short.

In terms of improvement, the UI should be more user-friendly.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for five years. 

It's very stable and very easy to scale. 

We have the VR application version of our support now but they have been very supportive. 

The deployment takes about a week or so, it's lengthy.

We're satisfied with the price, it's okay. The terms and everything are decided by the company. It's not a big deal for us.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

I would recommend it.

I did only one PoC which is critical to the organization so I'm not an expert. We had consultants who developed most of the prior applications, but my part involved a new project to integrate with our external partners with new changes from a legacy format to amodern web service. We needed to help them connect to our service, as well as access our data. They were already doing that, but with legacy protocols. They are now moving to a modern system.

This is something that is easy to do with IBM Integration Bus. Some of the challenges were  in understanding the overall format of the data and understanding their need. Most of the time was spent in understanding and analysis rather than coding. The coding, itself, didn't take much time. For me, it was a learning curve in understanding the tool, analyzing the graphical interface, and even learning how to develop an application. We had many prior applications built and to use as examples.

My dream is that most applications should have a graphical way of expressing what you want to do and kind of get to know different parts of the workflow in the application.

My favorite feature is the XML-based DFDL mapping, which is a tool that allows you to graphically map legacy data formats to modern data formats. I like it because there is less programming involved. On the internet I do not see many users who are aware of this capability or its importance. Since I have a theoretical background in this area I was able to quickly understand its value. In the past, we had to do a lot of programming in Java, whereas now, it is just linking one node in one format to another node in another format. The linking is done in a very smart way, and behind the scenes, the solution knows what to do. For different types of inputs and outputs, the interface already knows how to do the translation or conversion. All you have to do is draw a line and make simple additions. It has reduced the programming from one hundred percent down to ten or twenty percent.

In this solution, you can design the workflow too, graphically. There are two graphical tools in this solution. One of them is for the format conversion and it is called mapping. The other one is actually developing the application itself. It is a good GUI that I really like.

This solution would benefit from improvements to the configuration interface. It is hard to understand, and one small change can have a huge impact. For example, if you say Yes instead of No in one of the configuration settings, or Transactional instead of Non-transactional, then the whole meaning changes and it is difficult to track down the problem. This is the reason that many of our projects are progressing slowly. We just don't know what is going to happen with different parameter settings. It makes it very difficult to be creative.

The only other difficult part is that IBM adds its own meta-data, in addition to the normal, generic XML data, into the tree. It's hard for us to understand how to navigate the tree and pick what we want or figure out where our own application data lies, because of the additional IBM specific data. We understand that they do things this way in order to reduce the programming, but it's more of a learning curve.

This product is very stable. 

This solution is extremely scalable. It's a top product in terms of scalability. The mechanism and capability are there, although it is a difficult problem and only top-class experts with enough experience can do it.

We have four or five people who are development users of this solution. We also have a number of public users for the application.

Technical support for this solution is extremely good. They are very supportive. Their answers are very quick, and they quickly understand what problem I am facing.

It would be nice if they visited the site so that they could see the project and what is happening. It would give them the opportunity to look at the structure visually, instead of me continuously sending ZIP files. That would be awesome.

Prior to this solution, we used TIBCO. I was not involved in the integration bus, so I don't know the history before we moved to IBM.

I was not part of the initial setup for this solution. One of the things that I have been doing is migrating from version 9 to version 10, and I have been struggling with it for the past several months.

The problems are due, in part, because there are a lot of things that we didn't know. There were mistakes in the migration because some of the things were not upward compatible. It had to do with a bug in the new version. We'd had to fix things, and we are still working on it. If the vendor would have proactively warned people about the bug then it would have been a great move.

I take care of the upgrades myself, but the maintenance is handled by three of us.

I have been working on the migration myself, but I am using a support engineer to help us. He is working very hard, spending many weeks and months with me, guiding me when I experience a problem.

I did not implement all of the applications, but I took on the responsibility to migrate all of the previous ones. This is a challenge because I was not involved in developing them. I treated it more like a recompilation problem, but some of the functions are not working. The old libraries are no longer used, so I am learning all of the new things that have to be done.

Given that I thought the upgrade process would be automatic, I did not really have an upgrade or migration strategy. I thought that all of the projects would compile. When they did not, I looked back at the manual that the previous consultants had written.

What I found is that the project structure was a little bit tricky, and it took some time for me to understand it. Things were not done in a normal way, and it did not work when I set it up as such. This meant that I had to backtrack and follow the instructions in the manual.

Most of our products are IBM, which makes it easy to integrate them.

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.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

The message queue feature is very valuable.

The product could be improved by including more resources on SQL and improving the simplicity of the resources available. Additionally, the price can be reduced.

We have been using this solution for approximately four years and are currently using the first version.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and there are currently many people using the solution in our organization. We have plans to increase the usage of the feature.

It is quite expensive and can be lowered.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our organization is a bank, so we use IBM Integration Bus for integration with core services and test applications.

IBM Integration Bus facilitates communication between parties and legacy systems. For example, the banking industry has a lot of legacy systems, so IBM Integration allows for communication between the legacy systems and new ones and allows us to develop solutions that can respond to the new ones.

We currently use version 10 of IBM Integration Bus. The most beneficial feature is the integration we have with legacy services. We can do the integration to expose other technology to stop, rest and manipulate the output of many legacy services.

We would like to separate the services into different containers, and we don't have this ability right now on IBM Integration Bus. We are currently doing this as an organization, and IBM is setting up the OpenShift.

The version of the technology and current knowledge is a bit outdated. There is also no DevOps, and the process of deploying that is the downside. Regarding additional features, we would like better integration with external solutions like Apache Kafka.

We have been using this solution for six years.

It is a stable solution. The downside is that sometimes it is easier to use another post, like a language outside of IBM Integration Bus, but overall it's a good solution.

It is not scalable.

We do not communicate much with IBM, only for initial setup and completing bootstrapping technology. However, we have IBM partners that work with us. I rate the technical support a four out of ten because they are sometimes a bit selective with the partners they pay attention to.

Our company has been using IBM technology from the beginning.

The initial setup is difficult to configure and set up the first time. I rate the setup a four out of ten.

I rate this solution a seven 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 primary use case of IBM Integration Bus is for designing and developing solutions. We use App Connect Enterprise as a micro ESB and, in cases where we need rapid development, as a microservices platform as well. I'm currently dealing with an on-premises version, but it's deployed on an internal cloud. 

One of the most valuable features is how seamless and easy to use this solution is. This is a fantastic solution and a very measured product. 

There are a couple of things I want improved, but I think they have already touched upon all those things in the most recent version. I'm not using the most recent version—I use a version older than the most recent—but I'm sure that if I looked into and explored it, I would see more support on the CI/CD and more support for unit testing automation. I've read that they released all these things in the new version of App Connect. Once I explore the new version of this tool, I'll probably have a better idea of suggested improvements. 

I have been working in IBM for almost 17 years now. 

This solution is stable. It's a fantastic solution and a very measured product. We only need one person to maintain the DevOps pipeline, but we do have a team of 10 developers to deliver the work.

IBM's technical support is fantastic. Their support process is very good. 

This solution is cloud-based. We are using it in a container image, so the one time CI/CD setup is there, in the pipeline setup, and after that the process is very seamless. We just check in our code, and then the pipeline creates an image of it and deploys it onto our private cloud platform. So it's very seamless and there's no hassle involved. 

Initially, we needed about three people for deployment: one for administrative activities, one with DevOps knowledge, and one developer. 

We implemented through an in-house team. I work as an architect, but we have a DevOps team that takes care of maintaining the pipelines and as-needed administration activities. 

I generally do not get involved in the licensing or pricing because I'm a hardcore technical guy, but I'm aware of the fact that IBM is highly expensive, so not everybody can afford it. All the products are licensed. 

I have heard of MuleSoft, a platform that provides a solution for API management, ESB, everything. When it comes to ESB, they have a package or facility feature for unit testing as well, called MUnit or something. From an ESB development point of view, this is the complete package. I was lacking these features in App Connect, but I heard that the latest version includes things like unit testing, automation features, all those things. I also heard that they added AI—I'm not sure where, but IBM is pretty big on that, as well as on adding more and more features in that area. 

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. This is a very measured tool and IBM has been doing a splendid job with this particular platform. Earlier, it was only possible to have an on-premises installation, but now that it's compatible with the cloud, it's a very seamless and fantastic tool. Especially with the current release, I really like this product. 

In terms of advice I would give to those considering implementation, I would say that there could be a problem with integration. Nothing to do with the tools, but from a resourcing point of view. I've seen that a lot of people with Java expertise can face problems when being introduced to this technology without proper training. When a Java developer gets into this particular technology and starts developing stuff, they may be unaware of certain best practices, certain standards, certain conventions that should be used. In my team, when we hire new resources, Java is an advantage for us and a person with Java knowledge is highly welcome, but when we look at their knowledge in the technology itself, there may be issues. This platform is complex and only a person with the right knowledge will be able to deliver. So my suggestion to those who are considering implementation: while resourcing, ensure that you've got the right knowledge on the architect side as well as the developer side.