Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) Reviews

My main use case for Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is for a web application for any customers we have on my main apps.

A specific example of how I use Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) with my web application for my customers is that I customize a payment link. We call it on other platforms, and we can process the monthly payment.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) offers excellent features, and it is very intuitive.

The particular feature of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) that I find especially useful is the main console, which is very flexible and easy to use.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) has impacted my organization positively because it is a powerful platform and we can develop powerful applications very quickly.

An example of how being able to deploy powerful applications quickly has helped my organization is that for the most recent deployment, we were able to deploy this application in three weeks, which is very fast for us.

I cannot speak to how Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) can be improved.

I have been using Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) for four or five years.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is a very stable platform in my experience.

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is very fast and very strong in terms of scalability.

I have had one or two experiences with Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) support team, and I found them very good.

I find this interview to be very good. The process is very easy and quick, and it is more comfortable overall. I would rate this product a 10.

Our product is agnostic, so we have been using JBoss as our default app server. We have been using it for over ten years.

JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries. This is crucial as the lifecycle of these technologies is short, and staying up to date is essential to avoid issues.

They are trying to make it less heavyweight since app servers often deliver a lot of functionality. Still, if we aren't leveraging them, they can be too much for certain use cases. Making it lighter and more modular would probably be beneficial.

We have been using JBoss for over ten years.

I haven't dealt with their support or customer service. Some of our clients have bought support, but I haven't heard anything about its quality, so I cannot comment.

Positive

We deploy on app servers chosen by clients, including WebSphere and WebLogic, which are more expensive.

JBoss has a very easy way of setting up. We use it since it doesn't cause a lot of issues.

We just use JBoss and sometimes buy support for certain things. We are not affiliated with any vendors.

Having automation around JBoss is very beneficial. It allows for quick deployment and rolling out new applications easily. This flexibility translates to a lower total cost of ownership.

JBoss is the cheaper option out of the three when compared to WebSphere and WebLogic. Though I haven't done a detailed price comparison, the licensing fee is cheaper, and due to its flexibility, the maintenance is easier and cheaper.

We also considered WebSphere and WebLogic.

JBoss is definitely a flexible option and achieves what other app servers do but with more ease and support of new technologies. 

I rate JBoss nine out of ten.

I use it for Java server applications.

I work on an output management system. There are products that use JBoss as the Java server. It's a product from another vendor called the 'M' series. They use JBoss as the server behind it.

It's good. You choose JBoss when you need a Java server. The benefit is that it's fast, reliable, and well-established.

It was the choice of the customer, and they have no issues so far. It's a very well established product.

The price could be improved. Customers don't want to buy the license easily. It's nice that there is Wildfly, which is basically the same as JBoss, just without the price.

I have experience with JBoss because we just had it in a project.

The stability is good. I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

The end users are around 300 for this application. It is used on a daily basis. 

In general, I would prefer Wildfly. If I want a free version, I would go for WildFly.

And the support is also a factor. If you can do it on your own, you take Wildfly. If you need support, you can take JBoss.

It might be yearly. I am not sure.

In the past we evaluated IBM WebSphere, Oracle, and Tomcat. WebSphere system is a pain. Oracle is way overpriced, though. That's my opinion.

JBoss's performance is on par with its competitors.  

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. If other users need support, I would recommend JBoss. If they don't, they should just go with WildFly.

JBoss is a state-of-the-art Java server with a difficult support package. If you want to do a Java application, JBoss is usually a very good choice.

In my previous company, we relied on third-party APIs from a vendor. Recently, we were tasked with bringing those APIs in-house, reducing dependence on external vendors. We employed a JBoss server to facilitate the transition of these APIs into our existing system.

The tool's most beneficial feature is its scalability. People with limited technical knowledge can quickly grasp its functions with a brief introduction. The tool's ease of use makes it a plug-and-play solution, reducing the effort required to train users on its usage.

We integrated one of the largest payment service providers using JBoss. Specifically, we integrated Visa, a well-known credit and debit card provider, into our system using JBoss. As the project's lead software engineer, I executed this integration.

The tool's documentation could be improved to explain its usage and functionalities clearly. Having accessible documentation would save time for leaders like me when juniors seek information about it. The documentation should be self-explanatory and guide users on how to utilize the tool. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

I can't speak definitively regarding scalability features as I recently switched companies. However, I recommended implementing the Spring framework and JBoss in my previous role. Whenever I move to a new company, I advocate using these solutions. I rate its scalability a seven to eight out of ten. My company has around 150 million active users. 

I've never needed to directly contact tech support because our internal technical support team handled any issues.

The tool's deployment is easy. Our DevOps team primarily handled the deployment process. A team consisting of 40-50 members maintains it. 

The tool is worth its money. 

The tool's open-source nature influenced my decision to use it because it was cost-effective. Our business team handed it over to us, and they were aligned with using it. I recommend it because it offers multiple application routing data handling capabilities. It helped convert the data. 

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. If someone wants to start using it, I would tell them that there isn't much competition in the market because the tool is unique and has been established for a long time. It has set the benchmark, and other brands are striving to catch up with your range of services. This is something to be proud of. 

Our company uses the solution for enterprise clients in the banking and finance industries. 

We use different versions of the open source solution depending on client needs. 

The solution has flexibility and stability.

There is not much ability inside of the solution. The world is going beyond different micro and data-type things like Microsoft Office, so we are not seeing much ability within the solution. 

I have been using the solution for 15 years. 

The stability is rated an eight out of ten. 

The scalability is rated an eight out of ten. 

Technical support does not provide good responses to tickets so is rated a five out of ten.

Neutral

The setup is pretty easy so is rated an eight out of ten. 

The solution is cost-efficient compared to other products. Pricing is rated an eight out of ten. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company since we have developed an application that runs on the application server, JBoss, and another application server, such as Oracle WebLogic Server or WebSphere. In my company, we developed an application for the bank, and we deployed it under JBoss, WebSphere, or Oracle WebLogic Server.

The most valuable feature of the solution for me stems from the fact that our company can develop applications on JBoss, and we didn't see anything like it compared to WebLogic and WebSphere. The facility to install and handle JBoss is much lighter than the other application servers.

My company had faced some issues where our questions were not answered, and we did not receive proper solutions the way we wanted. The technical support of the product can be improved. Response time for support could be a bit better.

The price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product could be made cheaper.

I have been using JBoss for eight years. My company has a partnership with Red Hat.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My company did not face any issues related to scalability. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

My company works with banks of both small and big sizes.

I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

In comparison with the other products I have used in the past, I like JBoss's simplicity, lightness, and cost. Considering what my company used to use both solutions for, JBoss was better than WebLogic.

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

For the product's deployment and maintenance, our company has a system engineer who maintains both our instances associated with JBoss and supports the bank engineers.

The product offers a good return on investment.

I rate the product price as eight on a scale, where one means it is a very cheap solution, and ten points mean that it is a very expensive tool.

In terms of how JBoss supports enterprise Java standards and positively impacts our company's project, I can say that we use it, and we didn't have any issues. In our company, we have been able to do a posting of the application on the other application servers.

My company has not faced issues with the integration of the product with other software tools or infrastructures.

The product fits our company's requirements.

I recommend the product to others.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

JBoss is a middleware product. The customers use it to make connections between front-end applications and databases.

Red Hat provides the product and the support. We get good support from the support team. It is one of the benefits.

The product could be cheaper. The solution recently increased the prices.

I have been working with the product for 6 months to a year.

The tool is stable. The customers are buying the product.

The tool is scalable. We can install additional servers. We can extend our cluster horizontally.

The support is fast and reliable. It is very good. If we raise a support ticket, the support team will solve the problem somehow.

The deployment is not that complex. It is easy.

We pay a yearly subscription fee. There are no additional costs associated with the product.

I recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution an 8 out of 10.

Our primary use case is for web applications.

I like that it's open-source and free. All the features are very good.

The only thing I would change is the logging. The login logs are not very good. The login process could be improved.

I have been using JBoss for about ten years. We use version JBoss EAP 6.

The stability is great.

It is a highly scalable solution. We have about 500 to 1,000 users using the solution. It's very scalable, so we can easily add more users as needed. The users are mostly managers and route managers.

The customer service and support are great. They are very responsive and helpful.

Positive

The initial setup is not complex. It took us about a week to set up.

We did it in-house. We didn't need consultation. The deployment process is simple. We just have to load the application archive. It will deploy to the server, and then it will run. That's it. It's not a difficult task.

We do it in-house, so we don't need any third-party help. Only one person is needed to deploy and maintain the solution. There are no managers or developers required.

JBoss is open-source and free. There is no licensing cost. The solution is free to use.

I would definitely recommend the solution to other people. It's a great product.

I would recommend that they give it a try. It's a great solution, and it's free to use. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use JBoss for our websites and multiple products.

The greatest benefit of JBoss is that it was procured by IBM, thereby offering exceptional support for our banking operations.

The stability of the solution could improve with Microsoft Windows.

I have been using JBoss for approximately 10 years.

The stability of JBoss. However, if we are using Linux it is more stable than if we are using Microsoft Windows.

JBoss is capable of scaling, and it supports clustering for scalability. However, if clustering is not supported, we would need to use a load balancer to achieve scalability.

We have our own team that handles the support. I have not contacted the vendor for support.

We are using the web application server from IBM.

The setup of JBoss was straightforward.

We have a Red Hat professional partner who helps us with the implementation of the solution.

The number of people needed for the implementation depends on the build. If the setup is basic then one person can handle it.

The return on investment from JBoss depends on the specific solutions being used. In our case, based on the solutions we are running, I don't believe we are getting a good ROI. If we were running a large-scale solution such as a channel, then it would make sense. However, if we are using a small free solution, such as a back-office solution, and investing in expensive licenses, it may not be very cost-effective.

Despite the price increase after being acquired by IBM, JBoss still maintains its competitiveness. The package provided is more geared towards cloud-based deployments, whereas our setup is more traditional, which makes it slightly more expensive for us. As most vendors are transitioning towards cloud-centric solutions, companies like ours need to adapt accordingly.

The license from JBoss. There is a CAPX cost and an annual cost.

All the solutions we use are on-premise because we are a bank institution. However, we use some SaaS solutions but they are not connected to the on-premise systems.

I would recommend JBoss to others.

I rate JBoss a nine out of ten.

The high availability is great. Implementing it is very easy. Sometimes we only have to copy the installation or the house installation and change some parameters inside the host. After that, we run the instance in the console manager, and from the console manager, we can create new servers. It's very easy to implement a high availability installation. For me, that is the most important feature. 

The solution is stable. 

Sometimes the console has a glitch. For example, we might send some commands to stop the servers and we get some logs or some errors from the console. After some minutes the services stop yet the console doesn't refresh the status. 

Sometimes I miss the JDBC resources full administration from GlassFish. In GlassFish, you define the pool and if you have three or more domains you can deploy to each domain. However, in JBoss, you have to define each pool in every configuration. Sometimes you have to do extra work to define this JDBC force and that is something that sometimes is very annoying.

For the last three or four years I have been working as an Application Server Administrator using JBoss.

The stability of the solution has been good. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable and the performance is good. 

The scalability is not always perfect, however, it's very good. For example, maybe sometimes we only have two instances as we don't know how to balance three instances. We have to know how it's working the load balancer of a session data when we lose one instance or one server, for example. Maybe we need to learn more about that. 

I'd like some better documentation to find information about how it's working the load balancer in the high availability. We know that the load balancer is using the name of each instance and, for example, if we are using numbers on the line of each server, we know that from server one that the configuration is supposed to be to server two, and from the server two to server three, or something like that.

With JBoss right now we don't know. Maybe this is due to the fact that we only have two servers. With these two servers, it's enough for working and giving very good services. While we don't need to know that right now, maybe in the future we have to learn more or will have to search the documentation about how we have to configure our web server balancer or implement that load balancer with Jboss.

Before the new JBoss, we were using WebLogic, however, we changed off of that to Jboss. Recently, for the cost of paying one support for WebLogic, it's the same price to get a new subscription to JBoss. We were using the standard version for WebLogic and that version doesn't give us high availability in the future. That's why we decided to move on to Jboss. It's using a standard subscription and we get high availability with JBoss for the same price as we would pay the support for the WebLogic Standard Edition.

The implementation process is very easy.

For deployment, we only need three people. You don't require a big team.

If one person is used to deploy in the morning and then the other person is deploying in the afternoon. The next person is for learning from these two persons, therefore, basically, it's three people you need, however, maybe you could do it with two.

We pay to license on a yearly basis.

We were spending something like $12,000 in the first year. This year it's something close to $16,000.

We don't have additional fees or anything like that. It's a standard subscription.

We are customers. We only consume this product. We don't distribute it or anything like that.

In the last three years, I've been implementing the JBoss application solution. I try to create a high availability implementation, however, sometimes I try to get all the stocks working. We have some dependence on the developers as sometimes they have to implement some special implementation in each class. Basically, we have a full tolerance and in a special application, we have the full high availability.

I use the on-premise deployment due to the fact that I'm working for a government institution. We have some policies for on-premise user data. If we get a new change in our policies, we are considering moving onto the cloud. That said, for us, the cloud is not cheap as we have a lot of data. Sometimes we have maps and a lot of images and that is very expensive due to the fact that on the cloud you have to pay for each legalized transfer. Sometime soon maybe we will implement a small project. We are not thinking about moving all the infrastructure.

We have something like 1,000 users, however, the most important system has something like 500 users. We have two principal systems. One is for the clients and the other one is for internal use. We have something like 500 users on each server.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.